The Unbearable Bureaucracy of Wikipedia

[dlevere]

http://www.slate.com/articles/techno...to_fix_it.html

[47iscool]

I don't trust Wikipedia as they have a leftist bias, meaning on certain articles they see it how they want to see it.

[Pyriel]

Kind of depends on the article and which authors are exerting control over it. It also kind of depends on how you define your "wings". If you're going to the article on Benghazi and trying to insert theories you found on Infowars, then it appears Wikipedia has a left-wing bias. If you're going to articles on vaccines or quantum theory and adding sections on the autism risk of the MMR vaccine or quotes from Deepak Chopra's work then they probably seem to be right-wing.

They're not perfect, e.g., if an author of a particular stripe takes control of an article not many administrators care about, but it's also not very often that people's pet ideas can be backed by verifiable information from trustworthy, secondary sources.

[47iscool]

I'm not left wing or right wing, I call things how I see it.

By the way I don't watch Alex Jones/Infowars either as I think Jones is controlled opposition just as I think Fox News is. I get my news from the net because you can find info on it you would never see on all the controlled news channels.

Also I'd better not get too much into news stuff because dlevere might get upset and have the article locked.

[dlevere]

Also I'd better not get too much into news stuff because dlevere might get upset and have the article locked.

I am already upset, but not about what you two are talking about, it's something else.

Let's just keep on topic, which is how hard it is to get new people to post new articles due to the Bureaucracy of Wikipedia.

You guys know where to discuss politics, it's at my blogger site.

[47iscool]

I am already upset, but not about what you two are talking about, it's something else.

???

[dlevere]

It's a personal family issue.

[47iscool]

It's a personal family issue.

Oh okay sorry, I know how that is.

[Pyriel]

Those were just examples of things I've seen people start "Down With Wikipedia" campaigns over, after they failed to get their theories included in the article at all, or after their theories were included grudgingly as "Criticism" without the gravitas they wanted.

Deepak Chopra himself thinks Wikipedia is a bastion of conservative thought because they won't let his followers add his everything-is-possible-because-of-macro-scale-quantum-effects bullshit to certain articles. And his own biographical article isn't overly kind to his theories.