Shachar Shemesh wrote:
Care to give specific examples, so we can form an independent opinion?
The articles you tried to fix, as well as the username you were using,
would be greatly appreciated.
I prefer not to give specific examples. I refer to Wikipedia in general
and not to specific examples.
But if you're interested, check the history of any article about
politicians, or related to politics.
Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
Actually one thing that is rarely edited away in wikipedia is the
discussion pages. Thus we generally know what those faceless system
operators did. We can also tell when they did it and in many cases why.
Some of my comments were removed from discussion pages too.
Could you point out one such biased article? Because I've heard this
criticism before and every time I checked the editors' judgement seemed
very reasonable.
Any politically related article in Hebrew is biased towards the points
of view of most Israelis, comparing to Americans, Europeans or
Palestinians. Take any politically related article in Hebrew in
Wikipedia and compare it to other languages - you will find big
differences in content.
I suppose the same is also true for any language.
Nadav Har'El wrote:
But the fact is that anybody (including you and me) can go to Wikipedia
and fix what we find wrong. If you decide to go to Wikipedia's site,
you can set its agenda. This is very different from other sites, like
http://google-watch.org itself, where I cannot modify what they say if I
don't like them. So perhaps google-watch.org is more "dangerous" than
Wikipedia?? Personally, I think neither is dangerous.
It's not true. Not anybody can edit Wikipedia. You can edit Wikipedia
only if there is no editor ("system operator") who doesn't like you, and
if your username & IP address are not banned. And even then, if your
agenda is different than other editors, it will be reverted.
By the way, your comment about Heirarchic ranks is wrong. There are no ranks,
just tens of thousands of editors (anyone can be one, you can even be
anonymous), and there is one layer of "system operators" who have very
few special privilages (among them, the privilage to delete a page, something
which an ordinary user cannot do). Any computer system I know of have
such operators, and it doesn't make every such system a "dictatorship".
There are ranks. Not all editors have the same privileges. Some are
allowed just to edit, some are allowed to ban other editors (system
operators), some are allowed to give & take privileges from other system
operators (super operators) and some are allowed to give & take
privileges of super operators. It is hierarchic.
Wikipedia is not perfect, and some articles are crappy because of such
"edit wars" between people of opposing political views. But from that
to saying that Wikipedia is evil, there is a long way.
Wikipedia is not evil. The people who operate it are evil. It's a
hierarchic dictatorship.
By the way, I think any person can become evil if given enough power
upon others.
Uri.
--------------------------------------------------------
=================================================================
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
