Misplaced Pages

Latest revision as of 07:07, 31 December 2024

This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Countering systemic bias and anything related to its purposes and tasks.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Shortcuts WT:BIAS WT:CSB

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24Auto-archiving period: 30 days

This project page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Countering systemic bias This page is supported by the Countering systemic bias WikiProject, which provides a central location to counter systemic bias on Misplaced Pages. Please participate by editing the article, and help us improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.Countering systemic biasWikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic biasTemplate:WikiProject Countering systemic biasCountering systemic bias

WikiProject Countering systemic bias was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 19 February 2014.

Please read the associated WikiProject page before posting here. If you notify the project, please be prepared to show how any potential bias could be resulting in a lack of balanced coverage, or some other omission, as described on the WikiProject page.

Traditional ecological knowledge and traditional knowledge discussion at WP:FTN

There is a thread at the Fringe Theories Noticeboard about the articles traditional ecological knowledge and traditional knowledge that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Please consider joining the discussion. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 00:48, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

WOW people are being so awful. Sad that this is even up for discussion. PersusjCP (talk) 03:36, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Head of state

There is currently a discussion at Talk:Head of state regarding representation of countries in the lead photograph of the article. The thread is NPOV. Thank you. GeebaKhap (talk) 14:05, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages institutional bias and Covid-19

There is a conflict of interest when the scientific establishment itself is the subject of an article. Many topics about COVID-19, for example, the COVID-19 lab leak theory and COVID-19_lockdowns#Protests, challenge the biomedical and public health authorities themselves, which creates the possibility of a conflict of interest in the sources that are saying these hypotheses are lacking evidence.

OK, so there is no evidence in prestigious peer-reviewed journals. But those are the same institutions that benefit from the prevailing narrative due to their reliance on governments and drug companies who fund their research and refuse to allow certain investigations to be conducted.

Furthermore, there is a social pressure within the scientific community to not question the public health authority's recommendations due to the perception of an emergency that requires uniform compliance in order to save lives.

The politicalization of public health measures, including mask mandates and lockdowns, led to skepticism of dissenting voices, which were sometimes perceived as politically motivated or conspiratorial.

Publication bias occurs when research that aligns with the prevailing consensus is more likely to be published, while studies that challenge the mainstream narrative may be overlooked or rejected. Even well-credentialed scientists who challenge the mainstream view may struggle to have their work disseminated and may be dismissed by the public as dissenters or even conspiracists.

Scientific opinions that diverge from the official viewpoint are often perceived as politically motivated, which further reduce their acceptance in the mainstream.

The dominance of institutional bias, media influence, and the politicization of the COVID-19 pandemic created an environment where alternative perspectives were less likely to be incorporated into the mainstream narrative.

Key health organizations, such as the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), shaped the public discourse, often marginalizing dissenting views. This institutional authority, coupled with the widespread media reliance on these organizations for guidance, led to the amplification of the prevailing narrative while sidelining other perspectives.

Furthermore, the media’s framing of certain issues, including vaccine efficacy and the severity of the pandemic, often reinforced the consensus view and downplayed criticism or alternative theories.

As a result, despite valid concerns raised by biomedical professionals, these factors collectively limited the visibility and influence of alternative viewpoints on COVID-19. Lardlegwarmers (talk) 10:01, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Systemic bias in Misplaced Pages discussions, in light of prejudice

Hi, I only recently came across this project - interestingly, it didn't come up in the research I did for a very relevant essay. I guess Misplaced Pages is such a huge place that it's hard not to miss a l(and WikiMedia is even bigger)!

Something I've been wondering about is whether Misplaced Pages has any functioning mechanism to counter the tendency for editors to get burned out on editing particular pages due to the behaviour of other editors. For example, bullying, chauvinism or outright bigotry have a well-established tendency to push out people belonging to relatively marginalised groups - something I have observed on Misplaced Pages's autism-related pages over a number of years. I imagine this also helps explain the perennial male-dominance of this site!

Of course, one of the basic ideas of Misplaced Pages is that consensus should be reached among the editors who show up to a page, and that, for example, "notification done with the intention of influencing the outcome of a discussion in a particular way" is considered inappropriate. But faced with prejudice, stonewalling and so on, editors from more marginalised groups tend to just stop showing up over time. Do we have a way of countering that, besides the laborious dispute resolution mechanisms and obviously the slow influx of new editors over time? Oolong (talk) 18:53, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm not aware of any mechanism that attempts to address this, though I'm not that experienced an editor, and perhaps one exists that I'm not aware of. You might post a note on the WikiProject Editor Retention talk page, as a heads up that you've raised a relevant issue here. As a minor thing, I recently came across this essay, and you might think about whether there's something that would be good to add to the "What you can do" section about what editors can do to be allies. FactOrOpinion (talk) 20:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

• NA-Class Countering systemic bias pages
• NA-importance Countering systemic bias pages
• WikiProject Countering systemic bias articles