Of course, if an interested minority party has effectively infinite money, they can start to tip the scales.
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 4:13 PM, Ian Woollard <[email protected]>wrote: > On 14/03/2011, David Goodman <[email protected]> wrote: > > It is possible to provide arguments against the reliability of any > > source whatever. (And in the other direction, it is possible to take > > most sources and selectively quote them to provide evidence for > > support for any position whatever.) It is possible to destroy the > > integrity of any article by concentrating on finding weaknesses in the > > sourcing combined with careful use of sources that appear reliable, > > but are not really to the point. Even a single person doing this can > > work havoc, and if this is done in a concerted way, it provides ample > > scope for the expression of bias. > > I agree that it can be very problematic, but it only really works to > the extent that it's not obvious that this is happening, since if > enough people dig up enough sources via normal means they will > overwhelm the person or people trying to create an imbalance; because > they're nearly always going to be a minority. And if the views are not > in a minority, then their views are likely to be part of the NPOV > anyway. > > So the relativistic point of view of truth has significant limits; and > that's part of why the Wikipedia works. > > > -- > > David Goodman > > > > DGG at the enWP > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG > > -- > -Ian Woollard > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
