Page 3/3 March 7, 2011I guess you see the entry of "Constitution Society" as anachievement... I believe that we first have to establish what the factson the ground are...Trust it or not, Wikipedia is a kind of online "Establishment", ranked near the top on any websearches. That is power, and if we want to gain power to do the things we want, we have toplay in that arena, even if the odds are against us. It is just like the courts. They may becorrupt, but it is the main arena unless or until we can build an alternative.Yes, there is bias in Wikipedia. I have done a lot to fight it , with some success. If I had morehelp we could do a lot more. In Wikipedia, as in everything else, power goes to those whoshow up and do the work.I also have a wiki site, but lack the time to monitor it. Could use help for that, too.
-- Jon----------------------------------------------------------Constitution Society
twitter.com/lex_rexAustin, TX 78757 512/299-5001
3) Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 03:05:07 Joseph Zernik wrote:
To: email@example.comFrom: joseph zernikSubject: wikipedia? Wikipedic!!!Jon:Funny, if I were you, I would not be part of that scam...Please Google "Wikipedia" crossed with "Caltech".Already a few years ago a PhD student in CalTech conducted research, to uncoverthe identities of the anonymous editors, based on their IP addresses. There were lotsof them in US Government and large corporations...The editing of Wikipedia looks that way as well... Should we call it "Political"? Ormaybe simply "Wikipedic"?For example:
No matter what, Wikipedia editors repeatedly deleted any mention of the story ofRichard Fine, direct or indirect, by me or by others... for "lack of notability". At thesame time, the most obscure shopping malls around LA had entries on the site.
The very long entry on "Human Rights in the United States" is largely self-congratulatory... Things are not perfect, but close... No matter how much I tried toadd at the end, under the "Misc" section, a one line mention of each of the twoworst Human Rights atrocities of the past decade in the US, they were deleted.The first was reference by a UN rapporteur report and an article in the Nation, andthe second - by a plethora of official, experts, and media reports. There was noexplanation at all for these deletions, not even the claim of "lack of notability":
During Hurricane Katrina, the wardens left the prisoners locked, to drown asthe water was rising. The number of the dead was never officially disclosed...