スレッド

新しいツイートを表示

会話

is not a reliable source of information, and the fact that anti-circumcision activism, a notoriously erroneous, opinionated, misleading campaign, has successfully invaded many of its articles, like a basic article about the penis, is perfect testimony to this fact.
返信できるアカウント
@DISubredditさんが@ツイートしたアカウントが返信できます
返信先: さん
Why is a basic article about the human penis on Wikipedia promoting anti-circumcision organizations within the first section? It makes no sense. Why is the only image of a circumcised penis on the page not even a representation of what most circumcised penises look like?
1
1
Why does the article state that the medical use of circumcision is "rare"? Therapeutic circumcision is common worldwide. Why does the article consistently say that the medical benefits of circumcision are disputed, but does not say the same of the claims against circumcision?
1
1
Why are legitimate medical authorities like the CDC, WHO & AAP in the same sentence as amateur anti-circumcision nonprofits? When did we establish that the latter had any medical agency or credibility at all? Who is making these bizarre, unnatural calls? Oh, right- the 'editors'.
1
1
Why is the anti-circumcision campaign chalked up to be something official or relevant enough to be mentioned alongside medical research? Why is medicine scrutinized, but spurious, biased anti-circumcision rhetoric is recognized on Wikipedia articles? ...Oh, right, the 'reviews'.
1
Wikipedia, like Reddit, is a user-driven platform that relies fully on the community...and that's exactly why, like Reddit, it is completely unreliable and inundated with fake news like the anti-circumcision campaign. Wikipedia is far from being a reliable source of information.

Twitterを使ってみよう

今すぐ登録して、タイムラインをカスタマイズしましょう。
Appleのアカウントで登録
アカウントを作成
アカウントを登録することにより、利用規約プライバシーポリシーCookieの使用を含む)に同意したとみなされます。

トレンド

いまどうしてる?

スポーツ · トレンド
冨安のミス
スポーツ · トレンド
#ARSMCI
トレンドトピック: アーセナル#Arsenal
日本のトレンド
アンソニーテイラー
エンターテインメント · トレンド
クロちゃん
トレンドトピック: #水曜日のダウンタウン
日本のトレンド
これPK