Block, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, Check users, delete, edit, oversight, protect, rollback
1,839
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 863:
Line 863: + + + +
→Don't all of us are idiots: new section
The introduction to Wikipedia's own "Criticism of Wikipedia" entry reads, "The Seigenthaler and Essjay incidents caused criticism of Wikipedia's reliability and usefulness as a reference." [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Wikipedia] Googles return some 74,000 hits for "Essjay." Wikipedia's attempts to rewrite its own history are well known. Conservapedia's entry on Wikipedia, [http://www.conservapedia.com/Wikipedia#cite_note-135 footnote 136] {[http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=2778&st=0&p=20992&#entry20992 original source]) refers to the site admin at Wikipediareview who blow the Essjay fraud wide open, exposed the scandal, provoked the international condemnation and flight of experts and academics who washed thier hands of the project. This site admins name is Somey. Of all the apologetics, coverups & disinformation abundant, Somey has now said about Conservapedia's entry on Wikipedia, "their version of the Essjay story is one of the more accurate ones I've seen." [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=7152&view=findpost&p=176421]
The introduction to Wikipedia's own "Criticism of Wikipedia" entry reads, "The Seigenthaler and Essjay incidents caused criticism of Wikipedia's reliability and usefulness as a reference." [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Wikipedia] Googles return some 74,000 hits for "Essjay." Wikipedia's attempts to rewrite its own history are well known. Conservapedia's entry on Wikipedia, [http://www.conservapedia.com/Wikipedia#cite_note-135 footnote 136] {[http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=2778&st=0&p=20992&#entry20992 original source]) refers to the site admin at Wikipediareview who blow the Essjay fraud wide open, exposed the scandal, provoked the international condemnation and flight of experts and academics who washed thier hands of the project. This site admins name is Somey. Of all the apologetics, coverups & disinformation abundant, Somey has now said about Conservapedia's entry on Wikipedia, "their version of the Essjay story is one of the more accurate ones I've seen." [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=7152&view=findpost&p=176421]
[[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 21:24, 16 July 2009 (EDT)
[[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 21:24, 16 July 2009 (EDT)
== Don't all of us are idiots ==
Not all of us are idiots, I, for one, cannot stand liberals, and I'm an editor at Wikipedia. I see a lot of other conservatives at the site as well, many of the Wikipedians posting at http://wikipolitics.blogspot.com/ appear to be conservatives as well. The great thing about Wikipedia though is that while sometimes the biased morrons can sway articles, articles can be swayed back to a more neutral point of view if enough people fight them, whereas there's nothing that can be done about what's broadcast in public schools, colleges, and liberal news outlets. I guess I'm kind of a testimate to the claim of young "Wikipedians." It's sad that so many people are ignorant enough to fall for the BS that these liberals are putting out there, and it's even worse that many of these people are adults that are considered to be "educated." [[User:DMorris|DMorris]] 14:34, 30 November 2009 (EST)