The debate has begun.
Wikipedia, the most popular online encyclopaedia, has recently come under fire for changing the definition of the word "recession" to support the Biden Government of the United States and then locking the page to prevent any future modifications.
There is a history of changing the meaning of words.
Changing the meaning to fit your needs is nothing new; writers, historians, researchers, journalists, and others have all done it. People who want it done their way but are unable to do it themselves pay someone else to do it for them.
Wikipedia's credibility.
Wikipedia essentially provides such crowd-sourced data that if the page is not locked, even a child can edit it. There is another belief that any individual or organisation can redefine anything for any reason by paying to Wikipedia or by applying pressure, and have the page connected to the information locked. Because of this, Wikipedia's reliability is very low.
And Donations for Wikipedia.
In order to maintain its reputation as being impartial and ad-free, Wikipedia constantly requests donations. When Wikipedia requests for donations in the future, individuals might be reminded of the recession, which will put an end to the common practice of people feeling bad for not contributing.
Thoughts
Wikipedia is under fire because of its popularity, otherwise almost every such sources are likewise unreliable. We might think about excellent guidelines for freedom of speech and expression to counter inappropriate or dishonest adjustments.
