For some a stressful week has ended well, #justice having been served at the ground level, even as Sir #TrumpVirus claims vindication (pre retribution) - while attacking the jurors his attorneys chose.
(Wonder if they'll be paid now!)
But the verdict resulted in lots of new contribution$, driving the #DJT stock up.
If I say “dogs exist” but someone else believes that all dogs I see are “wolves” and not “dogs” then as far as they are concerned I am wrong.
I could give them a book showing the differences in dog and wolf anatomy but that assumes they will accept the differences are big enough to agree that they are two different animals which they won’t unless it fits their belief of evidence or they face social pressure to accept my belief as the truth.
Wikipedia is about verifiable facts from reliable sources. For Wikipedia, arguing with "The Truth" is not effective. Wikipedians don't write "because it's true" but "because that's what's in this source".
It is painful to see Katherine Maher viciously and widely attacked on Twitter, also for a quote restating how Wikipedia works.
I have worked with @krmaher
We were lucky to have her at Wikipedia, and NPR is lucky to have her.