ofcourse a person unwilling to get indian civs before his/her favourites will say this.
Im Bulgarian my civ is represented I do not have a horse in this argument. But seems you do not feel Indian enough to be represented by âyourâ civ. And that is the problem.
whatâs wrong with right-wing?
Can someone tell me what a âGKâ book is?
GK = general knowledge
General Knowledge books, you know like the ones used in kindergarten.
I donât know other countriesâ political situation, but in Hungary there are two types of right-wingers, the first are neonazis, who want to kill everyone who is not Christian Hungarian, the second group is the braindead idiotic sheep-group who follow our stupid, theif government who successfully ruined the country and became one of the worst in Europe.
Whichever government is in power atm in Hungary is the one I like
What do you like about them? How they ruined our economy, healtcare, education and international judgement? The taxes are the highest in Europe and the average salary is 500 euros.
I like their social policies
Define âinternational judgementâ
Read this full if you want a clearer picture of how Wikipedia can and is being manipulated.
It covers a completely different subject but you can get the idea.
Nothing in existence is âneutralâ in terms of bias.
Exactly. So why even claim Wikipedia to be a credible source when its so easy to vilify something there, all I have to do is to link to a an op ed that does the job as a source.
A biased source can still be 100% credible.
Not if itâs biased against you. 
Like that guy above once linked an article from a Pakistan based news media as source, that same outlet writes in support of public lynchings and state execution of people accused of blasphemy. Yes blasphemy. Doesnât get more medieval than that.
Uh Yeah it can still be credible.
Opinion pieces credible? Sure.
If they contain references then yes.
Even then an opinion piece does not have to be credible.
Opinion pieces are typically devoid of any reference and even if they have some they are citation of similar opinion pieces devoid of references or just following the similar pattern.
How did you stray from whether wikipedia was credible or not into opinion pieces?