Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Why is WikiPedia so slow?

[Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

On Tue, 3 Jan 2006, Josh wrote:

> I've pretty much stopped visiting wikipedia after an experience I had 
> there a while back.
>
> One of their articles contained an absolute factual inaccuracy, so I 
> corrected it and left a nice note in the comments indicating why I had 
> corrected it. A while later, someone changed it back with absolutely no 
> explanation. So, I left a longer explanation of why it was wrong the way 
> it was and corrected it again. Again, someone changed it back. This 
> time, another individual reinstated my changes. And again, this guy 
> undid them.. then had wiki issue a 24 hour ban on me!
>
> I got the ban lifted in about an hour by emailing an admin with a full 
> explanation, but the article contains the error to this day and the 
> people at wiki seem to have an agenda to keep errors like it in place.
>
> Basically, one of the admins strongly supports one belief system and 
> seems to systematically modify articles and ban posters who disagree 
> with him/her, regardless of factual accuracy. He even left messages on 
> my "talk board" criticizing me for my beliefs after the fact and his 
> talk board is full of similar stories from other posters.
>
> Its their site and they have the right to run it as they please - but it 
> drives me nuts that they claim "neutral point of view" as a goal when 
> their own admins strongly support one POV over another and use 
> administrative powers as a form of censorship.

Can you tell us which entry this was and what you were changing?  I am 
very interested and more details would help to clarify what was going on.

I think you are also allowed to add notes on a "controversy," and those 
will remain even if your work on the entry itself is deleted.


> Its still a great site to answer a quick "who, what where?" type 
> question..but don't count on it for any sort of accuracy.

I agree.  It is *mostly* accurate, but then one never knows.  I guess one 
never knows about any one source, but the degree of possible divergence 
from truth must be greater when *anyone* is allowed to change an entry! 
There is literally no limit to how far wrong you can go.

Mike

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion