{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreiexnvqe2zrjnznqjadf4qe4zjhdw6ozvzcmhffs2stv3wat7o5rzi",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:vtxoj4nvky7vqx2woiqtab75/app.bsky.feed.post/3mjrm7jh4eij2"
  },
  "coverImage": {
    "$type": "blob",
    "ref": {
      "$link": "bafkreid67sbpidhqxzndj2lyuutebll2qdkjmngdfz3kzm2bgx3hfvjau4"
    },
    "mimeType": "image/png",
    "size": 39044
  },
  "path": "/post/814229816146608128",
  "publishedAt": "2026-04-18T11:01:03.000Z",
  "site": "https://echo.tumblr.com",
  "tags": [
    "shafran-saffron",
    "omgellendean",
    "claims",
    "source reliability rankings"
  ],
  "textContent": "shafran-saffron:\n\n> omgellendean:\n>\n>> “Wikipedia is reliable due to the power of Autistic Pedantry tm”\n>>\n>> Wikipedia: apparently claims that bolsheviks genocided Borzoi dogs after the revolution.\n>>\n>> ALT\n>>\n>> source of the claim: NYT from 1991 and an article on National Purebred Dog site (29 March 2018). Neither provide further sources.\n>\n> If you’re a wikipedia reliability truther that wants to get quickly disillusioned, please check out their source reliability rankings. Like it’s genuinely crazy how RT is unreliable because “it’s state sponsored” BUT BBC(somewhat understandable) and RADIO FREE ASIA (which is usaid+NED funded and routinely publishes insane claims from “anonymous sources on the inside” and played a part in spreading the most ridiculous propaganda imaginable like the whole “north korea has a list of allowed haircuts” thing) aren’t.\n>\n> And its okay to like wikipedia still, just don’t pretend you’re getting unbiased (or well, true) information 100% of the time. I have long struggled with the fact that I still like it in spite of that, but I recently came to quite simple conclusion: what’s good about wikipedia isn’t nay notable level of factuality, IT’S ACTUALLY ITS LAYOUT. Like it’s so cool to be able to click on any any name of a player in some event and immideatly get lots of cursory info about them. The whole system of keywords being links to related pages lends itself so well to falling into interesting rabbit holes. Wikipedia is best when used 70% for fun 30% for (very cautious) research",
  "title": "“Wikipedia is reliable due to the power of Autistic Pedantry tm”"
}