Whether to called homeopathy medicine or pseudoscience is absolutely NOT a value judgement

scientology, which is widely believed to be a cult,

Homeopathy, which is objectively pseudo-science,

Can't scientology be both?

Homeopathy doesn't follow the scientific method - its axiomatic. I don't think its hard to dismiss it as a non-science.

Wouldn't better examples of 'taking sides' be like moral panics etc?

No offense, but your examples of Wikipedia's "Grey area" absolutley pales in comparison to an entire grokipedia that presents absolutely no counter points whatsoever.

If the choice is between:

• a self moderated encyclopedia that unquestionably will have some grey area edges cases where an active community will discuss the best way to interpret the facts.

Or

• a self-owned encyclopedia created for the sole purpose of hiding facts billionaires don't like.

Then the choice is very much black or white in deciding which is better to use.

Yeah, and it's worth clarifying when we assign controversial labels to topics that we do so only insofar as reliable sources already consistently do so. Even if it's an objective statement like "convicted smuggler", that still needs to be balanced with how much that aspect of the subject's life is covered by reliable, independent sources compared to the others. This is pretty similar to how we would treat a benign, neutral statement: we wouldn't write "John Doe is a businessman, politician, and person whose favorite color is orange" absent comparatively lengthy coverage from multiple outlets about Doe's obsession with the color orange.

We have a set of criteria for what constitutes a cult, and scientology is unequivocally a cult. If there's any debate, it's from the church trying to deny the fact.

Likewise, we also have the scientific method that disproves the health claims regularly made by homeopathy practicioners.

Do the word changes line up to an older version of wikipedia. It might be possible to identify who downloaded the copy and block the IP, lol.

The far right has always hated wikipedia.

Lemmy even had some weird account who spam posted about how terrible Wikipedia was for a while. Not sure if they stopped or if I just blocked them at some point.

Honestly looking at a bunch of articles it seems mostly fine, even some facts you’d imagine republicans would disagree with seem to be there and mostly objective. It seems buggy on mobile though half the buttons don’t work, my phone runs hot and I get javascript crashes.

Though it feels written by ai, there is a LOT of text that is ultimately saying the same things over and over, or not really saying anything, greatly inflating the size of articles.