 |
|||
|
|
|
 Wikipedia Muzzles the MobPosted on Aug 25, 2009
The online user-generated encyclopedia will require editors to approve changes to articles about living people, an effort to curb misinformation and the sometimes nasty food fights made possible by the site’s pioneering format. The changes are either a direct assault on Wikipedia’s soul or a sign of its growing maturity, depending on whom you ask. —PS
Advertisement Previous item: Multiple Blasts Kill Dozens in Afghanistan Next item: Democratic Fundraiser Arrested in $74 Million Fraud New and Improved CommentsWe are launching a major overhaul of our comments section. In addition to more robust spam filtering and moderation, new features include the ability to rate other comments, sort how they are displayed and respond directly via e-mail or in a thread. Unfortunately, commenters will lose their existing Truthdig identities. It's a pain, we know, but on the plus side you will now be able to log in with a plethora of options, including Google, Twitter, Facebook and Disqus accounts. Before launching this system we spent months in discussion with our top commenters. We listened to the feedback and we hope you like what we've come up with. Please direct any problems or concerns to us via our contact page. |
Truthdiggers of the Week: 400,000 Canadians Launching the ‘Maple Spring’
Email
Print
Share
Digg
Facebook
TwitThis
StumbleUpon
Reddit
YahooBuzz
Email
BlinkList
del.icio.us
Fark
Furl
Google
LinkedIn
Mixx
MyShare
NewsVine
Propeller
SphereIt
Technorati
YahooMyWeb
Newsletter 
Become a Fan
Follow Us
Subscribe
Tags|Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|FAQ: Comments and Moderation
Copyright © 2012 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.
By Anarcissie, August 27, 2009 at 7:01 am Link to this comment
My advice is to use Wikipedia as a starting point for looking into something. There is no guarantee that any particular article is going to be accurate, although most of them are. Articles about controversial subjects are regularly vandalized by people who believe the need of their side to win defeats anyone’s desires for truth and accuracy. Others vandalize for the hell of it, or to inflate their egos.
It’s unfortunate that there are people like that around, but there they are. Fortunately there aren’t very many of them. Wikipedia is an interesting and important project in the pursuit of finding a way to publish accurate information instead of material controlled by corporate propagandists, and I hope it survives and succeeds in spite of the saboteurs.
Report thisBy Purple Girl, August 26, 2009 at 4:27 am Link to this comment
when you have Americans who actually believe that Democrats are organizing ‘Death panels’ to kill off Granny, even though it was Democrats who gave seniors not only “Old Age pensions” (Soc sec),But Medicare…the american public can not be trusted to provide accurate information about anything!
Report thisI would not be surprised someone would even ‘edit’ WW2 as a War the Americans fought side by side with the Nazi’s! That Jesus was a Military General with a pearl handled revolver! That the US was ranked #1 in the Lowest infant mortality rate and Highest life expectancy!
Good for Wikipedia, I rely on it for quick ACCURATE information, not psychotic delusions- We have FOX “news” for that (and those who can’t Read or think for themselves).
By MarthaA, August 25, 2009 at 9:20 pm Link to this comment
Not only is the mob muzzled, but God is muzzled by the Culture of Critical Discourse that Wikipedia follows, as the Culture of Critical Discourse muzzles creative thought. When creative thought is muzzled, God is effectively muzzled in His creation. Why does religion, including Judaism and Christianity bow to the Culture of Critical Discourse; instead of being like Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego who wouldn’t bow to any other than God the Father?
Einstein said his thought came from God, but Einstein wasn’t under the Culture of Critical Discourse, if so his Theory of Relativity that had never been thought before would not have had verification to be allowed through the Culture of Critical Discourse.
Report this