Wikipedia is definitely credible trust me bro they’re listening to unbiased UKRAINIAN propaganda instead of conniving Russian propaganda

    • buh [any]
      ·
      2 years ago

      teacher: aNyOnE cAn eDiT it!

      me, naive: sure, but why would anyone just go on the internet and tell lies?

      anyone: :fedposting:

    • TrudeauCastroson [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Had a prof who loved wikipedia.

      But he was a science prof so that makes more sense. I think people who actually do legit research in those fields do the bulk of the article writing in those domains, and then the petty editors get in to fight over formatting.

      • Kaputnik [he/him]
        ·
        2 years ago

        Yeah I had a prof explain how the Royal Society of Chemistry actually went through and wrote most of the related articles on Wikipedia so he'd actually accept it as a source

      • Omega_Haxors [they/them]
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        The bullshit neoliberal politics barely ever touch the science side of the site. Still, fat L for them taking "ham sandwich" off the Energy Density page.

        EDIT: Oh that's funny, they actually went back and explained their reasoning for taking it off:

        This also explains some apparent anomalies, such as the energy density of a sandwich appearing to be higher than that of a stick of dynamite.

        That's right, you can't blow up a building with a ham sandwich, therefore the energy density is lower.

    • poppy_apocalypse [he/him, any]
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Counter point: I had a professor at a UC school who used wikipedia as a source in his textbook. The course was transnational gangs and the professor was a retired orange county cop. Edit: the book

  • TheGhostOfTomJoad [he/him,they/them]
    ·
    2 years ago

    Pure :cope: lol

    I haven't been to :reddit-logo: yet but I hear its pure american\ Ukrainian propaganda just like this. According to :reddit-logo: Ukraine is on the verge of winning

      • Tankiedesantski [he/him]
        ·
        2 years ago

        I saw a blue check on Twitter unironically saying that NATO should be prepared go exploit the situation if Ukraine causes the collapse of the Russian military.

    • Elon_Musk [none/use name]
      ·
      2 years ago

      the front page is a sight to behold and we should probably be taking screenshots every 6 hours

    • BeamBrain [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      "We have been winning a glorious string of unbroken victories, each closer to our capital than the last"

      • p_sharikov [he/him]
        ·
        2 years ago

        In an unusual maneuver, Ukrainian forces have routed the Russians towards Kiev

  • blobjim [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    To see how propagandistic Wikipedia can be, check out how their "concensus-drive" list of reliability of sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Sources

    The Economist and Radio Free Asia are greeen. TeleSur, RT, PressTV, Electronic Intifada, any Chinese media outlet, etc. are all red.

    • BeamBrain [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      lol that even Wikipedia says Victims of Communism is red-baiting bullshit

  • CyborgMarx [any, any]
    ·
    2 years ago

    80 tanks, 516 armored vehicles

    lol get the fuck outta here, these NATO shills always tip their hand with the most ridiculous exaggerations

  • happybadger [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    I'm so curious about that Il-76. The carrying capacity I've seen quoted on those is like 120 paratroopers.

    • Alaskaball [comrade/them]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Here's the thing about massive planes like that: they leave a shitton of wreckage that's burning and easily captured on photo or video.

      Yet for being such a large and easily identifiable plane, there hasn't been any photos confirming the destruction of said plane

      • happybadger [he/him]
        ·
        2 years ago

        https://twitter.com/search?q=il-76&src=typed_query

        You seem to be right so far. There's one photo of a crashed Il-76 but it's from 2014. Another video of a crashed aircraft is featured but it's an AN-26 from Ukraine. The US was willing to go on the record saying two Il-76s were shot down but that's about as close as I've found to confirmation.

        • nat_turner_overdrive [he/him]
          ·
          2 years ago

          did the state dept mention where those IL-76s went down? maybe somewhere near iraq's WMD storage facilities? :bean-think:

          • happybadger [he/him]
            ·
            2 years ago

            See that's the thing. If it were a vague report I'd discount it entirely but they seemed to have a pretty precise understanding of where they went down: Bila Tserkva, 50mi south of Kyiv / Vasylkiv, 25mi south of Kyiv

            https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FMfu4JEXsAIfYUx?format=jpg&name=900x900

            Searching those locations doesn't give any photos either, but Vasylkiv does seem to have an active air war over it: https://twitter.com/i/status/1497523635703238656

            • nat_turner_overdrive [he/him]
              ·
              2 years ago

              I wonder if they really did get them then, but it sure seems like there would be at least some photos of massive wreckage from at least one of them

              • happybadger [he/him]
                ·
                2 years ago

                The liveuamap.com map doesn't seem to indicate whether that area is held by Russia or not. There's an airbase nearby so it would be a priority target at least. I did find video of an Su-25 (https://twitter.com/i/status/1497659200666845186) and Mi-24 (https://twitter.com/i/status/1497650174935642116) getting bonked north of Crimea though. Wouldn't want to be in those fuckers.

          • happybadger [he/him]
            ·
            2 years ago

            Just observers I think. There was a flight radar tracking one of the Global Hawk drones watching Russia's fleet in the Black Sea. Presumably they've got the same setup over Ukraine, if not by drone then at least geostationary satellites.

            • Awoo [she/her]
              ·
              2 years ago

              They were up simultaneously over the Black Sea, Romania and Poland. The RAF also had a C135 up over Hungary but I don't know where that is now.

        • Alaskaball [comrade/them]
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Also on record saying Sadam had WMDs so their word is worth less than the air they waste uttering it

      • Staines [he/him, they/them]
        ·
        2 years ago

        It would be the easiest thing in the world for a couple of Ukrainians to take pictures of a massive crashed Il-76. It would be a big propaganda victory. Yet there are no pictures after a full day?

        • jackmarxist [any]
          ·
          2 years ago

          They crashed into putins bunker in the kremlim and got sensored by 1984 Russia

      • Tofu_Lewis [he/him]
        ·
        2 years ago

        I wonder they're using "shot down" instead of a less-impressive "forced to land" in this instance?

          • Tofu_Lewis [he/him]
            ·
            2 years ago

            I think being forced to make a controlled landing is a bit different than crashing in a blazing fireball.

            • furryanarchy [comrade/them,they/them]
              ·
              2 years ago

              Not in practical operational terms. Planes take a long time to repair, if repairs are even possible. Damaging an aircraft and forcing a landing takes it out of action for so long it's just as good as turning it into a flaming fireball. It achieves the same result.

  • Mike_Penis [any]
    ·
    2 years ago

    I mean the attackers will always sustain more losses unless it's extremely asymmetrical. But yeah this is probably a result of propaganda to boost moral.

    • zifnab25 [he/him, any]
      ·
      2 years ago

      I liked the single Ukrainian jet that shot down six Russian aircraft.

      Just comically unbelievable but people eat that shit up with a spoon. There's going to be a movie about the Brave Ukrainian Resistance Fighters produced by Mel Gibson with an Oscar nomination by next year.

      • Tankiedesantski [he/him]
        ·
        2 years ago

        Ace claims have always been bullshit. Pretty common for one side to claim more kills in an engagement than opposing records say were even present in that engagement.

        • zeal0telite [he/him,they/them]
          ·
          2 years ago

          Off the top of my head there are several bullshit things Ace claims used to do. They're more for WWII stuff but probably still fudged.

          1. Squadron kills were all attributed to one member to boost his personal number.

          2. Kills are just when a plane makes another plane permanently leave that fight. No destruction needed.

          3. One engine = one kill. Take down a bomber and that's 2/4/6 kills.

  • ShareThatBread [he/him, he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine

    Check out the source

    https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-europe-60517447?pinned_post_locator=urn:asset:6feb197c-9473-44eb-a42f-088d9c12d6ee

    Absolutely hilarious

  • KoeRhee [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    they have both Russian and Ukrainian claims there now. Also the invasion does seem to be going... not well, but it's hard to say with a complete lack of data on Ukrainian casualties.

    • zifnab25 [he/him, any]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Also the invasion does seem to be going… not well

      They surrounded Kiev inside two days. How badly could it possibly be going?

      • Mike_Penis [any]
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        gib source on kiev being surrounded.

        ok i see some articles about it

      • SerLava [he/him]
        ·
        2 years ago

        I agree Russia is very likely to win - they haven't committed very many of their available forces - but TBF Kiev is pretty close to the border, and they seem to have driven a spear into it

    • Tankiedesantski [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Also the invasion does seem to be going… not well

      I think you might be overestimating how quickly even a very successful military operation of this scale is able to go.

      The US took twice as many soldiers into Iraq, a country that is smaller, less populated, and completed isolated compared to Ukraine, and it took them a month to subdue the country.

      Russia is taking half as many soldiers in as the US into a bigger country that is receiving constant Intel and weapons from NATO and has made significant territorial gains in the first 3 days.

      The real question is whether this pace is sustainable for the Russians and whether Ukrainian resistance will stiffen or crumble in the coming weeks.

  • Bratsva1 [none/use name]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Is this place unironically pro-Russia? Like just because America and Russia don't like each other, doesn't mean you have to suck off Russia to satisfy your hate for your own country.

    Russia started an unnecessary war that will not contribute to anything. If they had just sent troops to secure Dontesk and Luhansk, fine, but this whole invasion off the country is way past the line off reasonable.

    Edit: The 40+ value is only for the first day off fighting and haven't been updated since. So people are throwing a fit over old info that is not valid anymore

    • WhyEssEff [she/her]
      hexagon
      ·
      2 years ago

      this is actually fucking propaganda though. this doesn't conform to reality. you don't need to love russia to point out misinformation

      • Bratsva1 [none/use name]
        ·
        2 years ago

        Russia isn't releasing any stats for deaths, so what exactly would they put up? The "expert" opinions off people on here?

        • Glass [he/him,they/them]
          ·
          2 years ago

          given the choice between posting nothing and posting hilarious propaganda, the obvious responsible choice is to post nothing

          • Bratsva1 [none/use name]
            ·
            2 years ago

            The fog of war means no one knows what is actually happening. Plus who would decide what is "propaganda"? You? It says according to Ukrainian claims above the stats, so anyone with any critical thinking should know there is some bias

            • NuraShiny [any]
              ·
              2 years ago

              2800 killed vs 40 killed. Some Bias. Wild.

              Please tell us more of your amazing wisdom, you're doing so very well so far!

              • Bratsva1 [none/use name]
                ·
                2 years ago

                Check the source and those are stats from the first day and haven't been updated since. So are people just upset that up to date stats aren't being posted if no one is reporting?

                • NuraShiny [any]
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  Are you shook? I ask because you replied the same fucking thing to me three times.

                  These stats were obviously false on day 1 as well so I don't see how you are making a good argument.

                  • Bratsva1 [none/use name]
                    ·
                    2 years ago

                    Shook, hot and bothered. Also the first day was mostly just air strikes on Ukrainian ports and airports, where the aim was to just damage the infrastructure, so believeable

                • WhyEssEff [she/her]
                  hexagon
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 years ago

                  doesn't matter, under no reasonable circumstances should that data have been allowed to stay up there uncritically for as long as it did if wikipedia cared one semblance about factuality. If there's no verifiable information, you should put up no information.

                • ShareThatBread [he/him, he/him]
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  The “source” is the BBC reporting on a Facebook post which they then explicitly state the figures are not verifiable. Fucking moron.

            • Glass [he/him,they/them]
              ·
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              Yes, exactly. A hilarious, utterly-disconected-from-reality level of bias that renders any info from that source completely farcical. I'm glad you see the problem.

        • WhyEssEff [she/her]
          hexagon
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          literally just add "unconfirmed" if it needs to be there. it's against their own policy, though they def don't care.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published_or_questionable_sources_as_sources_on_themselves #2

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox_or_means_of_promotion #1

          • Bratsva1 [none/use name]
            ·
            2 years ago

            Every claim about a war could be labeled as "unconfirmed". Everything about WW2 and any major war could be labeled as that. You seem to just be petty about this type off things.

            • WhyEssEff [she/her]
              hexagon
              ·
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              ww2 is one of the most heavily documented events in history. this is an ongoing event where information is king. these are not comparable, i'd suggest you shut the fuck up before you umm actually your way into denying the holocaust as a hypothetical given your ww2 comparison.

    • Huldra [they/them, it/its]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Is it gonna be necessary to add a mandatory "fuck Russia" section to any posts criticising or making fun of Ukraine now like this is :reddit-logo:?

      • WhyEssEff [she/her]
        hexagon
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        inb4 mods putting hasan's spinning "vladimir putin bad" cube next to the logo because people have zero object permanence :michael-laugh:

      • Bratsva1 [none/use name]
        ·
        2 years ago

        No.... but the discourse seems to be that Russia is justified in this unnecessary war because "Fuck America"? The world isn't some binary between good and evil like people on here like to image.

        • Huldra [they/them, it/its]
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Chill the fuck out with "Oh you're fellating Russias hairy balls" shit then if you're concerned about nuance.

          Edit: oh wait lol hour old account, nice

        • invalidusernamelol [he/him]
          ·
          2 years ago

          The world isn’t some binary between good and evil like people on here like to image.

          Yeah, we need more nuance, like uncritically believing some of the Ukrainian propaganda instead of none of it. Give lies a chance!

    • NuraShiny [any]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Yea it's pro Russia to point out that this is a clear falsehood. We are all personally sucking Putin's dick in here and it's really hard to get a spot so anyone not on it at any given second posts pro Russia propaganda here.

      • Bratsva1 [none/use name]
        ·
        2 years ago

        Ya but the poster also conviently left out the other sections that say "Claims according to Russia"

        • NuraShiny [any]
          ·
          2 years ago

          Doesn't matter. These stats are utter garbage, everyone knows it.

          Quite frankly if this amateur hour garbage is their idea of propaganda, I do think Russia is winning.

    • OrionsMask [he/him,any]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Weird to be making this statement on a post criticizing propaganda that is so insulting to one's intelligence that it boggles the mind they'd even bother making it up. Apparently not tolerating such misinformation is now fellating Russia.