This is but another subtlety of the intent to affect a fundamental change of perspective of the population.
"The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... _not_truth
Truth IS whether we recognize it to be or not.
Because that which is true can be made to appear false, and that what is false can appear to be made true, it is only appropriate the eternal pursuit of truth be inclusive of all thought, even that which may appear to be "wrong." For without that primary consideration we remain trapped and hidden within the labyrinth of our own errors.
It is a damn dirty trick that Wikipedia would include "pedia" in the name as if to liken their site to an "encyclopedia," but therein the similarities end. For any other encyclopedia of mention-able notation would have applied a wholly different standard and when called to question would reject the assertion those topics contained within were "verifiable" only, and "not necessarily truth."
Wikipedia, however, strives to create a difference insofar as the information contained within need not be necessarily true nor false but rather verifiable
to the extent it may be referenced as a citation. By this ledger, anything and everything ever written or spoken would naturally qualify for incorporation.
But this is not so and represents a grave mis-justice for the policy allows for "known" demonstrably untrue (read: disinformation) to be added, simply due its publication, while at the same time makes possible exclusion of other material by means of consensus
vote by committee.
And therein lies the fatal flaw. Science is NOT done by consensus. Science is the study and acceptance of that which IS.
That some, or most, or even all but one choose to reject the truth of their own free will makes no difference as to what is good and true. Truth does not succumb to any force of will no matter the magnitude of said collective will.
The democratic process infects
all that it touches; science included.
For most, a well-functioning democracy is nothing more than the besetting of an advanced state of group-think; mass hypnosis, if you will. Natural rights are not established due the opinion of the few or the many; quite so they are the acknowledgement of that which IS (truth) and inform our every ethical decision. And so, the fickle desires of the many (or the few), in a vile attempt to suppress and control the thoughts of others, will forever inevitably end in their own tumultuous ruin.