Resent so I have an original copy to reply to.
Dear All
It is certainly not news that a lot of deliberately biased editing goes on
on the Wikipedia. It is equally known that there are mechanims to address
these issues.
But that is where the problem lies - those intent on skewing information
I use Flickr as an example, but is it not the firwst time that I have
come
across this type of behaviour.
And so, tiny cliques and coteries flourish like fiefdoms in the blind
spots
of the mechanisms created to ensure that we all strive for the same
principes. What is worse, there are big
A case in point, the other day I was looking for images of mosquitos
sucking blood and and came across blatant pornography on Flickr. I added
a
few lines about pornography on Flickr and because it was reverted
Rui Correia.
The Flickr images you linked to, if it was you, were the sort one
It is this that is tarnishing the name of the Wikipedia and
driving away good editors.
Rui Correia.
When the going gets tough the tough get going. They don't throw their
hands up, vainly protest, then give up.
Possible conflict of interest is a legitimate concern; however, it is not
a
