Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Microevolution

2017-03-23T19:59:24Z

ChristopherW: They are, needless to say, wrong

'''Microevolution''', broadly defined, is the inevitable small-scale changes in [[allele]] frequencies in a population within the same species. Under this broad definition, this change in overall allele frequencies occurs with every birth or death of a member of the species. In other words, some generations of people might be taller than the last or shorter than the last based on the number of individuals who happen to have the "tall" gene. Microevolution does not involve changing from one [[kind]] to another, and it does not create new kinds.

Evolutionists have argued that the distinction between microevolution and [[macroevolution]] is arbitrary because it is the same process. They are, needless to say, wrong.

== Microevolution in Bacteria ==
Microevolution is the process by which bacteria may develop resistance to antibiotics. We regularly use antibiotics to stop bacterial infections. When a colony of bacteria is exposed to an antibiotic that matches the colony's gram type, the bacteria are likely to die if they do not have genes that produce molecules to inhibit the action of the antibiotic. If the survivors reproduce, the colony will contain only bacteria that have inherited resistance genes. A second application of the same antibiotic will not affect them.

Genes to resist various antibiotics are natural for bacteria to produce because the many species of bacteria war with each other for more space using these chemicals on each other. In order to protect itself, a given species of bacteria would at least have genes for resistance to the particular antibiotic it produces. Resistance genes can also be produced by random mutation, usually through mistakes in copying the DNA during cell division. Furthermore, bacteria can pass genes for antibiotic resistance between strains and even between species through [[plasmids]] containing the gene for resistance.

Because antibiotics have been used so widely in medicine, there is increasing concern about developing strains of bacteria that can acquire multiple resistances to most of the antibiotics we use (such as [[MRSA]]). High compliance with infection control measures and a prudent and more restrictive use of antibiotics are the key measures to prevent epidemics based on bacteria with multiresistance.

== Rapid Rates ==
If the world is as old as is commonly claimed, we should see animals today evolving at a rate consistent with this, over thousands and millions of years. That is why it is shocking for the scientific community that the accumulating evidence shows instead that microevolution occurs over decades, rather than thousands and millions of years. David Skelly of Yale University has observed that the evolutionary rates are far faster than those presumed by evolutionary theory: {{cquote|Ecology is being transformed by the recognition that ecological and evolutionary timescales are not easily differentiated. A 1999 review of evolutionary rates by Andrew Hendry and Mike Kinnison (The pace of modern life: measuring rates of contemporary microevolution. Evolution 53:1637-1653) provided the striking conclusion that rates of contemporary evolution are much faster than generally appreciated... Our work reveals that a number of traits including critical thermal maximum, embryonic development rate, and thermal preference behavior all show variation consistent with local adaptation that occurs on the scale of decades and tens of meters. These findings offer a startlingly different picture of interactions between organisms and their environment prompting us to rethink, in larger sense, how we should conceive of ecological assemblages.<ref>Skelly, David K. "[http://environment.yale.edu/skelly/RapidEvol.html Rapid Evolution]." ''Yale University''. School of Forestry & Environmental Studies.</ref>}}

====Australia's 'Toxic Toad'====
In one of the most widely publicized cases of unexpected rapid microevolution, Australian Cane Toads defied predictions based on evolutionary theory by experts about how they would react after being introduced to Australia. Within decades they evolved longer legs and heat tolerance, running amok and causing havoc for the wildlife; and instituting a national catastrophe for the continent. {{cquote|The evolutionary processes spawned by the cane toad invasion have occurred in a span of just 70 years. This adds to evidence from the past two decades that populations can adapt quickly when selection pressure is strong. 'We're taught evolution occurs over these very, very long time frames. But in systems like these, it's incredibly fast,' Shine, the study co-author, said.<ref>Roach, John (2006, February 15). "[http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/02/0215_060215_cane_toads.html Toxic Toads Evolve Longer Legs, Study Says]." ''National Geographic''.</ref>}} {{cquote|'All of a sudden in the last 10 years it changes,' said Skelly. 'They're moving into areas where the physical environment is not like anything in their native range.' That implies that the cane toads have evolved more tolerance for the hotter climates they are now encountering. This is on top of the discovery last year that the toads at the forefront of the invasion had evolved longer legs than those in the interior of their range. The ability of animals to evolve so quickly needs to be factored into invasions, or the dangers of invasive species will likely be underestimated, argue Skelly and his colleagues Mark Urban, Ben Phillips and Richard Shine in an article in the March 28 issue of the Proceedings of the Royal Society-B.<ref>O'Hanlon, Larry (2007, April 2). "[http://news.discovery.com/animals/toxic-cane-toads-evolve-quickly.html Toxic Toads Evolving Quickly]." ''DiscoveryNews''.</ref>}}
====Human Evolution====
According to the assumptions of evolutionary theory, if evolution always went at the rate that we see today, there should be 160 times more differences between humans and apes. So rather than assume 'the present is the key to the past', scientists then decided that evolutionary rates today have accelerated for some reason. {{cquote|If humans had always evolved at this rate, the difference between modern humans and chimps should be 160 times greater than it really is. 'We realized we must be in a transient [phase], that evolution hasn't been going this fast for long in our species,' Harpending said. 'And so we wondered why.'<ref>Roach, John (2007, December 11). "[http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/12/071211-human-evolution.html Human Evolution Speeding Up]." ''National Geographic''.</ref>}} {{cquote|'I was raised with the belief that modern humans showed up 40,000 to 50,000 years ago and haven't changed,' explained Henry C. Harpending, an anthropologist at the University of Utah. 'The opposite seems to be true.'... If evolution had been proceeding steadily at the current rate since humans and chimps separated 6 million years ago there should be 160 times more differences than the researchers found. That indicates that human evolution had been slower in the distant past, Harpending explained.<ref>Schmid, Randolph E. (2007, December 10). "[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/10/AR2007121001235.html?nav=rss_nation Researchers: Human Evolution Speeding Up]." ''The Washington Post''.</ref>}}
====Italian Wall Lizards====
In 1971, scientists introduced 5 pairs of Italian Wall Lizards to a small island off the coast of Croatia. However, the Croatian War of Independence prevented the scientists from returning to the island for more than 30 years. When the war ended, tourism finally began again in 2004, allowing them to return. The researchers were unsure if the lizards would still be alive. Instead, they found the island swarming with lizards, which genetic testing showed to be descendants of their original 5. The new lizards had wiped out native lizard populations by evolving cecal valves, muscles between the large and small intestines, with which to digest native vegetation, an expanded gut structure, as well as a harder bite. {{cquote|Italian wall lizards introduced to a tiny island off the coast of Croatia are evolving in ways that would normally take millions of years to play out, new research shows. In just a few decades the 5-inch-long (13-centimeter-long) lizards have developed a completely new gut structure, larger heads, and a harder bite, researchers say... Such physical transformation in just 30 lizard generations takes evolution to a whole new level, Irschick said. It would be akin to humans evolving and growing a new appendix in several hundred years, he said. 'That's unparalleled. What's most important is how fast this is,' he said.<ref>Johnson, Kimberly (2008, April 21). "[http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/04/080421-lizard-evolution.html Lizards Rapidly Evolve After Introduction to Island]." ''National Geographic''.</ref>}}
====Plant Evolution====
Contrary to theoretical predictions based on evolutionary theory, genomes for the Angiosperm ''Silene'' (a flowering plant) evolved far more rapidly than was expected, as reported in the January 2012 issue of ''PLoS Biology''. Researchers are now trying to find an explanation for why such rapid microevolution is occurring, and a new model that will avoid such surprises in the future. {{cquote|Contrary to theoretical predictions, these genomes have experienced a massive proliferation of noncoding content... The evolution of mutation rate, genome size, and chromosome structure can therefore be extremely rapid and interrelated in ways not predicted by current evolutionary theories... We discuss the implications of the unprecedented mitochondrial genome diversity found within Silene and possible alternative explanations for the rapid genome evolution in this genus.<ref>Sloan, D.B., Alverson, A.J., Chuckalovcak, J.P., et. al. (2012, January). "[http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001241 Rapid Evolution of Enormous, Multichromosomal Genomes in Flowering Plant Mitochondria with Exceptionally High Mutation Rates]." In ''PLoS Biology''. Public Library of Science.</ref>}}

====Rodent Evolution====
A 2009 study observed that rodents evolve at "unprecedented rates" given climate change and population growth, and that rapid evolutionary change in rodents has been occurring for over a century. The article also notes research on rapid Micrevolution has previously been "infrequently documented", but that despite this, more and more evidence is cropping up for it. {{cquote|Our results indicate that over the last 100+ years, rapid morphological change in rodents has occurred quite frequently, and that these changes have taken place on the mainland as well as on islands. Our results also suggest that these changes may be driven, at least in part, by human population growth and climate change.<ref>Pergams ORW, Lawler JJ (2009, April 21). "[http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0006452 Recent and Widespread Rapid Morphological Change in Rodents]." PLoS ONE 4(7): e6452. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0006452.</ref>}}

== Microevolution in Creation Science ==
Whilst some [[creationists]] agree with the concept of microevolution, but call it [[adaptation]], they argue that there is a large difference between microevolution and [[macroevolution]]. However, evolutionary scientists do not make any real distinction between the two,<ref>[http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2006/0428doser.shtml AAAS press release]</ref> and leading creationists argue that using the terms "microevolution" and "macroevolution" obscures the real distinction, that being between the unobserved information-generating mutations that evolution requires and information-destroying mutations that are observed.<ref>[http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/2996#micro_macro Arguments we think creationists should NOT use] (Creation Ministries International).</ref>

== References ==
{{reflist|2}}

== External links ==
* [http://creationwiki.org/Microevolution Microevolution - CreationWiki]

[[Category:Molecular Biology]]
[[Category:Molecular Genetics]]
[[Category:Microbiology]]

Miss USA

2017-03-22T17:55:46Z

ChristopherW: Removing non existent categories

The '''Miss USA''' beauty contest is an annual beauty contest which originated in 1952 to select the United States contestant in the Miss Universe pageant.

PubMed

2017-03-22T17:55:10Z

ChristopherW: Removing non existent categories

'''PubMed''' is a free search engine that accesses the MEDLINE [[database]], an online collection of [[scientific]] papers relating to life sciences and biomedical topics. PubMed was released to the public in 1996.<ref>{{cite web |title=PubMed Celebrates its 10th Anniversary |work=Technical Bulletin |publisher=[[United States National Library of Medicine]] |date=2006-10-05 |url=http://www.nlm.nih.gov/pubs/techbull/so06/so06_pm_10.html |accessdate=2011-03-22}}</ref>

==How to Run a Search in PubMed==

PubMed is an ideal way to find technical, scientific articles that will qualify as professional sourcing for medical claims. To run a search in PubMed:

# Go to the [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/advanced advanced search feature].
# If seeking secondary sources, set Publication Type to 'review.'
# If you'd prefer recent articles within the past 5 years, set Date-Publication accordingly.
# Simply enter search terms you are looking for as 'All Fields' although you can restrict the search to 'Title', 'Text Word', or 'Text/Abstract' if you wish.

==PubMed Identifier==

A '''PMID''' or PubMed Identifier is a unique number assigned, for purposes of categorization, to a PubMed paper.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK3827/#pubmedhelp.Search_Field_Descrip |title=Search Field Descriptions and Tags |accessdate= 15 July 2013 |date= |work= |publisher=National Center for Biotechnology Information |quote= }}</ref> PMIDs differ from '''PMCIDs''', since PMCIDs are assigned to all papers in PubMed Central, not just those on PubMed.<ref name=PMCID>{{cite web|last=Keener|first=Molly|title=PMID vs. PMCID: What's the difference?|url=http://chess.uchicago.edu/docs/PMCIDinPubMed.pdf|publisher=University of Chicago|accessdate=19 January 2014|date=19 May 2008}}</ref>

==References==
{{Reflist|35em}}

George A. Borgman

2017-03-22T17:53:59Z

ChristopherW: Replacing non existent category

'''George Allan Borgman'''<ref>''Who's Who in America'', 1994, 48th Edition, Vol. 1, page 362</ref> (January 22, 1928 - October 26, 2009) was a musicologist, freelance jazz journalist, and was contributing editor and columnist for ''The Mississippi Rag''.

== Early life ==
Borgman was born on January 22, 1928 in St. Louis, Missouri, the only child of Herman Francis and Martha Vivien (Wecker) Borgman. He grew up in St. Louis and attended the St. Louis Institute of Music, where he earned a Bachelor of Music degree and Indiana University, Bloomington, where he received a master's degree in musicology.<ref>''Who's Who in America'', 1994, 48th Edition, Vol. 1, page 362</ref>

Borgman played saxophone and clarinet with such big bands as Larry Tice's Orchestra (1946), Jack Everett's Orchestra (1946) and Jack Staulcup's Orchestra (1950). He was a member of the U.S. Army from 1946 to 1948, playing clarinet in an Army band in Heidelberg, Germany, where he took a music appreciation course at Heidelberg University. From 1953 to 1957, he worked as a high school band<ref>Patterson's American Education, Volume 53, Homer L. Patterson, page 47, 1956.</ref> and chorus director, two years in Colorado<ref>Patterson's American Education, Volume 53, Homer L. Patterson, page 47, 1956.</ref> and two years in Nevada. He married Janet Ferroli, a Bostonian, in February 1957. In Spring and Summer 1957, Borgman took a television production course at the School of Radio Technique, New York City. He subsequently worked as a lighting assistant on the Drew Pearson and Quentin Reynolds TV documentaries, and he also worked as a film editor in New York. In 1958, he was a film editor and TV cameraman at KOMU, Missouri University's commercial (NBC affiliate) TV station in Columbia.<ref>''Who's Who in America'', 1994, 48th Edition, Vol. 1, page 362</ref>

== Military career ==
In September 1958, Borgman rejoined the United States Army in order to get into the Counter Intelligence Corps. After attending the Intelligence School, Fort Holabird, Maryland, he was assigned to a CIC unit in West Berlin. During his Army career, he was a special agent in the CIC, Military Intelligence and the Defense Investigative Service, working mostly in civilian clothes, and spent almost ten years in West Germany, about five years in Washington, D.C., and one year in the Republic of Vietnam. His military rank at retirement in September 1979 was Chief Warrant Officer 3.<ref>''Who's Who in America'', 1994, 48th Edition, Vol. 1, page 362</ref>

== Jazz journalist ==
In the early 1980s, he worked as an investigator for the Wackenhut Corporation and almost five years as a personnel security specialist (Department of Army Civilian), U.S. Army Military Personnel Center, Alexandria, Virginia.<ref>''Who's Who in America'', 1994, 48th Edition, Vol. 1, page 362</ref> He later worked six years as a sportswriter for a group of suburban newspapers in the Boston area.<ref>''Who's Who in America'', 1994, 48th Edition, Vol. 1, page 362</ref> In 1988, he began writing stories for jazz periodicals, mostly about traditional jazz and ragtime, although he has also written about swing, big bands, bebop and modern jazz. He claims that his military experience in conducting interrogations has helped him in interviewing musicians.<ref>[http://imdb.com/name/nm1744354/bio Internet Movie Database]</ref>

Borgman's reviews of jazz recordings and books have appeared in such periodicals as the ''IAJRC Journal'', ''Cadence'', ''Joslin's Jazz Journal'', ''TJ Today'' and since 1992, ''The Mississippi Rag'', for which he wrote a monthly column, "Yankee Jazz Beat"<ref>Internet Movie Database</ref><ref>''Who's Who in America'', 1994, 48th Edition, Vol. 1, page 362</ref> up until the newspaper went defunct in 2009 upon the death of its owner [[Leslie Johnson]].

Borgman has written numerous reviews, in-depth articles on the history of jazz and on numerous jazz musicians including jazz drummer [[Tommy Benford]], ragtime composer [[Joseph F. Lamb]],<ref>Ragging It: Getting Ragtime Into History (and Some History Into Ragytime), H. Loring White, page 311, 2005.</ref> Ruby Braff, [[Al Casey]], [[Buzzy Drootin]], Sabby Lewis, Stan McDonald, Chuck Folds, Stan Kenton, et al.<ref>''The Mississippi Rag'' - various issues</ref> His most recent in-depth aritcle was on Glen Gray and the [[Casa Loma Orchestra]], in the October 2006 issue of ''The Mississippi Rag''.

In the mid-1990s he was voted in the top 12 jazz critics in the ''Jazz Beat'' poll. He was a member of the Jazz Journalists Association and has written liner notes for Stomp Off Records and various jazz recording artists and groups, including Neville Dickie, the Back Bay Ramblers, Stan McDonald's Blue Horizon Jazz Band and Lucinda Ellert's Happy Feet Dance Orchestra. He has also written articles for the annual Hot Steamed Jazz Festival (Essex, Connecticut).<ref>Internet Movie database</ref>

Borgman was working on a book about the Casa Loma Orchestra.<ref>''The Mississippi Rag'', October 2006</ref>

== Family ==
He has two sons and played a substantial role in his son Eric's feature comedy film The Man in the Movie.<ref>Man in the Movie Website</ref> His eldest son, Paul, is a mechanical engineer, and resides in Connecticut with his wife.<ref>Who's Who in America, 1994, 48th Edition, Vol. 1, page 362</ref><ref>Internet Movie Database</ref> Two daughters predeceased him. Borgman died on October 26, 2009 in Needham, Massachusetts after a brief illness.

== References ==
{{reflist|2}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Borgman, George A.}}
[[Category:Journalists]]
[[Category:Musicians]]

Secret society

2017-03-22T17:52:23Z

ChristopherW: Removing non existent category

A '''secret society''' is "a club or organization whose activities and inner functioning are concealed from non-members. The society may or may not attempt to conceal its existence."<ref>http://books.google.com/books/about/Secret_Society.html?id=-cyjMQEACAAJ</ref>

Claiming to work for a secret society on the internet is a common tactic used to conceal the fact that one is the only one campaigning a specific topic.

<references />

Category:Evolution

2017-03-22T17:42:34Z

ChristopherW: Adding category pseudoscience. Evolution is a nonsensical "theory" promoted by atheists in an attempt to corrupt people and bring them to Satan and hell.

[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Origins Debate]]
[[Category:Pseudoscience]]

Wikipedia

2017-03-22T17:34:17Z

ChristopherW: /* Unbiased editor recruitment */ added another problem with editor recruitment. Many conservatives use Conservapedia instead of Wikipedia.

[[Image:Wpp.png|thumb|right|200px|The multilingual Wikipedia home page]]
'''Wikipedia''' is an [[internet|online]] [[wiki]]-based [[encyclopedia]] hosted and owned by the non-profit organization [[Wikimedia Foundation]] and financially supported by grants from left-leaning foundations plus an aggressive annual online fundraising drive.<ref>http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/Wikimedia_Foundation_announces_tenth_annual_fundraising_campaign</ref> Most of Wikipedia's articles can be edited publicly by both registered and anonymous editors,<ref>http://books.google.com/books?id=wMhBQ0WdjF4C&pg=PA199#v=onepage&q&f=false</ref> mostly consisting of teenagers and the unemployed.<ref name="theregister.co.uk">http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09/18/sanger_forks_wikipedia/</ref> As such, it tends to project a [[liberal]]—and, in some cases, even [[socialist]], [[Communist]], and [[Nazi]]-sympathising—worldview, which is totally at odds with conservative [[reality]] and rationality.

Wikipedia was co-founded by [[Jimbo Wales]] (an [[Atheism|atheist]], [[libertarian]], and [[objectivist]]), and atheist philosophy professor [[Larry Sanger]] in 2001. The website was originally created to complement the now defunct peer-reviewed online encyclopedia [[Nupedia]] as a way for collaboration on articles. However, Wikipedia overtook Nupedia and became an independent project hosted by the [[Wikimedia Foundation]], which also hosts various related websites, known as "sister projects", such as ''Wikinews'' and ''Wikibooks''.

Critics of Wikipedia state that Wikipedia's articles contain [[Examples of bias in Wikipedia|systemic bias]],<ref name=howtheleft>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/david-swindle/how-the-left-conquered-wikipedia-part-1/</ref> and that the information included within its articles are a mixture of truths, half-truths, and falsehoods.<ref name=hnn>http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/125437</ref> The nature of Wikipedia also makes it subject to spin and [[bias]], examples of which include paid public relations advocacy and inserting libelous content into the biographies of politicians for a political purpose.<ref name=hnn/> Wikipedia was also criticized for having a [[liberal bias]] in its articles about politics, despite Wikipedia's "neutral point of view" policy.<ref name=howtheleft/>

__TOC__

== Continuing loss of influence ==

Wikipedia's traffic level stems from its high placement in Google searches, and that many people rely upon it for quick research regarding trivial facts. However, users are turning to alternatives such as the voice-based iPhone application [[Siri]] or the Knowledge Graph display on Google search result pages of key facts about search targets.<ref name=timesindia>{{cite news|url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tech/tech-news/internet/Google-eating-into-Wikipedia-page-views/articleshow/29072825.cms?referral=PM|title=Google eating into Wikipedia page views?|work=Times of India|first=Subodh |last=Varma|date=January 20, 2014|accessdate=March 20, 2014}}</ref> Wikipedia page-views dropped by 2 billion between December 2012 and December 2013. Wikipedia's most popular versions are leading the decline: page-views of the English Wikipedia dropped by 12 per cent, those of German version slid by 17 per cent and the Japanese version lost 9 per cent.<ref name=timesindia/>

In addition to the number of visitors declining, there continues to be a drop in active editors as well. In August 2012, it was reported that Wikipedia has a shrinking base of editors.<ref>[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/08/pro-evolution-wikipedia-has-shrinking.html Pro-evolution Wikipedia has a shrinking base of editors plus [[Quora]] is Wikipedia's worst nightmare]</ref> At the same time, ''Business Insider'' indicated [[Quora]] was "Wikipedia's worst nightmare".<ref>[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/08/pro-evolution-wikipedia-has-shrinking.html Pro-evolution Wikipedia has a shrinking base of editors plus Quora is Wikipedia's worst nightmare]</ref>

== Unreliability of Wikipedia ==

Wikipedia relies on self-selected "editors" to fabricate and compile articles, with no preference given for scholars in the fields about which they are writing. This fact may disqualify Wikipedia from being considered a genuine encyclopedia, ironically even by its own standards. An encyclopedia is supposed to be a collection of articles by "well-educated, well-informed content experts."<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopedia</ref> Theoretically, Wikipedia is supposed to compensate for this weakness by requiring references to reputable secondary sources. But editors can delete, without collaboration, any text or entry they dislike, citing one of the many Wikipedia guidelines for doing so. Entries posted by scholars in the field, based on peer-reviewed, academic articles are deleted by editors with an ideological bias. Wikipedia, then, only represents the majority view of its editors.

As the contribution of volunteer editors has declined, some of the void has been replaced by paid public relations professionals. These paid editors seek to present their client companies or individuals in the best possible light. This has resulted in many articles being transformed into paid advertising pieces that take advantage of the English Wikipedia's high placement on Google search results. This chronic problem has become so severe that the Wikimedia Foundation has proposed amending its terms of service to require disclosures of paid editing conflicts of interest.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_use/Paid_contributions_amendment|title=Terms of use/Paid contributions amendment|date=February 21, 2014|accessdate=March 20, 2014}}</ref> In the competition to control content, the paid PR editors win out because they are monitoring pages as a full-time job, while editors seeking to keep content more balanced are only part-time volunteers.

In 2008, the ''American Journalism Review'' declared concerning Wikipedia:
{{cquote|"An even more blunt assessment appears in the encyclopedia's "Ten things you may not know about Wikipedia" posting: "We do not expect you to trust us. It is in the nature of an ever-changing work like Wikipedia that, while some articles are of the highest quality of scholarship, others are admittedly complete rubbish." It also reminds users not to use Wikipedia as a primary source or for making "critical decisions."<ref>http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=4461</ref>}}
Despite its official "neutrality policy," [[Examples of Bias in Wikipedia|Wikipedia has a strong liberal bias.]] In an article entitled "Wikipedia Lies, Slander Continue," [[journalism|journalist]] [[Joseph Farah]] stated Wikipedia "is not only a provider of inaccuracy and bias. It is wholesale purveyor of lies and slander unlike any other the world has ever known."<ref name="wnd.com">http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=83640</ref> Mr. Farah has repeatedly been the victim of defamation on Wikipedia.<ref name="wnd.com"/> In December 2010, [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologist]] [[JP Holding]] called Wikipedia "the abomination that causes misinformation".<ref>http://tektonticker.blogspot.com/search/label/Wikipedia</ref>

Some say that Wikipedia's unreliability is systemic, citing Douglas Adams: "''In other words—and this is the rock-solid principle on which the whole of the Corporation’s Galaxywide success is founded—their fundamental design flaws are completely hidden by their superficial design flaws.'' Wikipedia, which is written by anyone, still struggles to solve the need for traditional quality controls characteristic of conventional [[encyclopedia]]s. The self-policing practices have produced results and accuracy some claim is far better than originally expected but still widely questioned. Research released in April 2012 claimed 60% of wikipedia article contain "inaccuracies", leading the "Daily Mail" to dub it "Iffy-pedia".<ref>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2131458/Up-articles-Wikipedia-contain-factual-errors.html</ref> The lack of consistency and uniform supervision leaves an ever-present shadow over any given piece of information. Many in the [[academy]] insist that it is unreliable source for [[research]] and an unacceptable reference in many classrooms. However, Wikipedia steers people to original [[source material]], and with the use of [[hyperlink]]s and [[search engine]]s, it has become the most widely used intermediary [[reference]] tool on the [[Internet]].

According to the style manual for the [[Associated Press]], the largest news agency in the United States, Wikipedia should not be used as a primary source, but the hyperlinks in articles may be helpful as sources.

Wikipedia has millions of entries on trivia and mundane topics ranging from an explanation for "duh"<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duh (only after Conservapedia criticized the entry on the English word "duh" did Wikipedia eventually remove it)</ref> to singles by obscure rock bands<ref>such as ''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honk_If_You_Love_Fred_Durst Honk If You Love Fred Durst]'' (accessed April 1, 2007)</ref> to arcane British nobility.<ref>Part of the article about [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Liddell Henry Liddell], a 19th-century Vice-chancellor of Oxford University and author, includes that his grandfather was the youngest son of the 8th Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne, and that his daughter was the child ''Alice in Wonderland'' was written for (accessed April 1, 2007)</ref> There are editions of Wikipedia in 250 languages, and 130 have more than 1000 articles.<ref>[http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias List of Wikipedias - Wikimedia], accessed April 1, 2007.</ref> After about four years Wikipedia had about 450,000 entries,<ref>Aaron Weiss, The Unassociated Press, N.Y. Times, Feb. 10, 2005, at G5.</ref> and after six years it had about 1.7 million entries.<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Statistics English Wikipedia statistics] accessed April 1, 2007</ref> Four years later this number had more than doubled again: in November 2011, there were more than 3.8 million content pages.<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Statistics English Wikipedia statistics] accessed May 6, 2011</ref> As of February 2014, there are more than 4.4 million "content" pages, many of which lack educational value. On important topics, the information is often misleading due to the unchecked, [[Wikipedia#Leftist bias|systematic liberal bias]] that dominates Wikipedia.

==Origins==
Initially, Wikipedia was hosted on servers operated by Bomis, Inc., a company that also sold pornographic pictures.<ref>Martin Hickman and Genevieve Roberts, "WIKIPEDIA," The Independent (London) p. 12 (Feb 13, 2006)</ref> The majority owner of Boomis had lost his fortune in a lawsuit, and the Wikipedia volunteers feared that if all of Boomis' assets were seized, ownership of Wikipedia would be transferred. In 2003, Jimbo Wales addressed this risk by founding the Wikimedia Foundation to take control of Wikipedia's assets. The Wikimedia Foundation is a non-profit organization that provides support for Wikipedia and other similar projects,<ref>[http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Home Wikimedia Foundation] accessed April 7, 2007</ref> and also the free MediaWiki software that runs Wikipedia and Conservapedia.<ref>[http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki MediaWiki home] accessed April 7, 2007</ref> It also gives out millions of dollars in grants each year to liberal causes that recruit liberals to edit Wikipedia so as to reflect their biases.

== Leftist bias ==

{{See also|Leftist roots of Wikipedia}}

''See also:'' [[Examples of Bias in Wikipedia]]

Wikipedia shows a systematic bias in the proportion of articles which treat controversial issues. It ignores its own [[NPOV]] policy when it allows contributors to "delete well-referenced information" merely because it comes from a [[scientist]] who holds a [[minority view]]. It would only be a violation, if the article used the information to give a false impression of the proportion of scientists adhering to that view, but liberals use "[[undue weight]]" like a sledge hammer. They are either unaware or unconcerned about their bias.

This is not surprising, given this [[Zogby]] poll:

While 97% of [[Republican]]s surveyed said the media are [[liberal]], two-thirds of [[political independent]]s feel the same, but fewer than one in four independents (23%) said they saw a "conservative bias". [[Democrat]]s, while much more likely to perceive a conservative bias than other groups, were not nearly as sure the [[media]] was against them as were the Republicans. While Republicans were unified in their perception of a [[left-wing]] media, just two-thirds of Democrats were certain the media skewed [[right-wing|right]] – and 17% said the bias favored the left.<ref>http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1262</ref>

David Swindle writes at [[FrontPage Magazine]]:
{{cquote|There was not a single ideological vision driving Wikipedia’s founders and core contributors as they launched the project. Jimmy Wales, who would become the face of the project and its “benevolent dictator,” according to Andrew Lih’s ''The Wikipedia Revolution'', is a libertarian and [[Ayn Rand|Ayn Randian]] [[Objectivism|Objectivist]]. Also important in shaping Wikipedia was the so-called “hacker ethos,” the culture that has developed amongst computer programmers over the last 40 years and been shaped by the Left, the counterculture, popular culture, and [[anarchism|anarchist]] thought.

What binds together these ideologies is a [[utopia]]n ideal that human beings are more prone to [[altruism]] rather than self-interest. In Wikipedia Revolution Wales is quoted as saying, “Generally we find most people out there on the internet are good… It’s one of the wonderful humanitarian discoveries in Wikipedia, that most people only want to help us and build this free nonprofit, charitable resource.” Ward Cunningham was the programmer who created the wiki concept and software. According to Lih, he believed in the Wiki because “People are generally good.”

Lih explains how this philosophy is embedded within Wikipedia’s rules:

A core idea Wikipedia embraced.. was to assume good faith when interacting with others. The guideline promoted optimistic production rather than pessimistic nay-saying, and reads, “Unless there is strong evidence to the contrary, assume that people who work on the project are trying to help it, not hurt it; avoid accusing others of harmful motives without particularly strong evidence.

But as it worked out, Wikipedia in practice has strayed from these utopian ideas because of the ease with which political and social bias trumps altruism.

After almost a decade of rapid growth and free-wheeling experimentation the situation at the site by the Summer of 2009 was chaos. Political operatives would sabotage one another in electoral contests by vandalizing pages. More malicious misinformation filtered in freely, with living historical figures accused of involvement in conspiratorial plots.<ref>http://frontpagemag.com/2011/08/23/how-the-left-conquered-wikipedia-part-1/</ref>}}

[[File:Peter-Singer.jpg|right|thumbnail|250px|The atheist philosopher [[Peter Singer]] defends the practice of [[bestiality]] (as well as [[abortion]], infanticide and [[euthanasia]]). Despite holding these immoral views the [[liberal]] and pro-[[evolution]] academic establishment rewarded his views with a bioethics chair at [[Princeton University]].<ref>
*[http://creation.com/the-basis-of-a-christian-worldview The Basis of a Christian Worldview - Creation Ministries International]
*[http://creation.com/answer-to-philosophy-religion-professor-on-biblical-exegesis-and-the-problem-of-evil CMI answers philosophy/religion professor on biblical exegesis and the problem of evil]
*[http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2011/06/the-dangerous-mind-of-peter-singer ''The Dangerous Mind''] by Joe Carter, ''[[First Things]]''</ref> See: [[Atheism and bestiality]] and [[Wikipedia on bestiality]] ]]

Wikipedia also has an automatic Wikimedia Commons editing software called "Commonist," which allows the user to upload multiple files at once. The symbol of [[communism]] - the "hammer and sickle" of the leftist ideology which murdered millions in the former [[Soviet Union]] - is featured prominently on the instruction page as well as the tags that mark each uploaded image.<ref>https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Commonist</ref>

=== Research ===

On August 23, 2011, David Swindle published an article at ''[[FrontPage Magazine]]'' detailing how Wikipedia has been taken over by the [[Leftist|political left]] and he cited statistics relating to Wikipedia's articles on [[Anne Coulter]], [[Michael Moore]], [[Glenn Beck]] and [[Keith Olbermann]] which helped demonstrate the Wikipedia has a leftist/liberal bias plus he discussed the liberal/leftist cultural foundations of Wikipedia.<ref name="frontpagemag.com">[http://frontpagemag.com/2011/08/23/how-the-left-conquered-wikipedia-part-1/ How the left conquered Wikipedia - Part 1]</ref>

For example, Swindle wrote:

<blockquote>"Consider Ann Coulter versus Michael Moore. Coulter’s entry (on August 9, 2011) was 9028 words long.* Of this longer-than-usual entry, 3220 words were devoted to “Controversies and criticism” in which a series of incidents involving Coulter and quotes from her are cited with accompanying condemnations, primarily from her opponents on the Left. That’s 35.6 percent of Coulter’s entry devoted to making her look bad. By contrast, Moore’s entry is 2876 words (the more standard length for entries on political commentators), with 130 devoted to “Controversy.” That’s 4.5% of the word count, a fraction of Coulter’s. Does this mean that an “unbiased” commentator would find Coulter eight times as “controversial” as Moore?"<ref name="frontpagemag.com"/></blockquote>

==Purported "Tertiary" Source and Arbitrary Standards==
Wikipedia purports to be a "tertiary" source, relying on edited work from reputable sources. The policy is meant to build on the work of qualified editors of secondary sources. Some accuse Wikipedia, therefore, of relying on [[hearsay]], and discouraging the application of [[logic]] and new development of new insights. The result is an agglomeration of reheated "consensus" with little or no intellectual merit of its own; in particular, it is impossible to challenge orthodoxy, received wisdom or commonly held misconceptions through the Wikipedia system, no matter how factually incorrect those orthodoxies might be.

Supporters of Wikipedia would claim that relying on secondary sources encourages reliability and objectivity. However, there are cases of Wikipedia applying it's standards arbitrarily. For example, the case of Wikipedia editor "Yeoberry" (user ID 3606936), an editor with a Ph.D. in church history who first posted materials about "Icons" on August 6, 2012, with multiple citations to historical documents. The material was removed and Yeoberry was told that Wikipedia is a "tertiary" source and so he needed to find reliable secondary sources. On April 4, 2013, Yeoberry again added largely the same material, this time citing a newly published academic paper in a peer-reviewed journal. The information was again removed, with editors, at least some of whom religiously affiliated with the organization supporting icons, claiming the editor had a "COI" (conflict of interest). Neither time did the editors removing Yeoberry's material consult Yeoberry. But when Yeoberry reverted to his edition, he was charged with "edit warring." When Yeoberry challenged the arbitrary use of Wikipedia criteria he was blocked from editing indefinitely and then his access to his own talk page was also blocked.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&oldid=548948980#Proposal:_Indefinite_Block</ref>

Wikipedia articles, especially on controversial or political and religious topics, are often guarded by editors who have an interest in slanting the content of the article, may have no formal education on the topic, and can find a so-called reason for suppressing the information they want to suppress. Editors can claim the source is unreliable (as they interpret that); that information gives "UNDUE" weight to the topic the information is about; peer-reviewed, academic articles written by scholars can be removed by editors if, in the opinion of an editor, the view expressed is "Fringe" or if the contributor has a "COI" (conflict of interest) if he's the author of the secondary source or has an advanced education or other interest in the topic; etc. Editors with advanced education in a topic, citing sources from peer-reviewed journals, can have their contributions deleted and their participation prohibited if a few other editors, without such qualification but with enough knowledge of the Wikipedia jargon, decide to suppress him or her.

Originally, encyclopedias were written by scholars, either by one or a few whose knowledge is considered "encyclopedic" (i.e. very broad) or each article is written by an expert in the field. But in Wikipedia, expertise in a given field can disqualify one from contributing in that field resulting in Wikipedia being accused of being a "[[idiocracy]]".

==Economics==

Though Wikipedia is non-profit, the [[Wikia]] project of its co-founder is very much for-profit and has raised millions of dollars in [[venture capital]]. Already Wikipedia has been criticized for favoring Wikia. When Wikipedia community voted 61-39% percent to treat all links to other sites equally by removing nofollow (Google-ignored) tags for all of them, the Wikipedia co-founder overruled this decision and Wikipedia now favors Wikia in its treatment of nofollow tags.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/04/28/wikipedia-special-treatment-for-wikia-and-other-wikis/|title=Wikipedia: Special Treatment for Wikia and some other Wikis|author=Nik Cubrilovic|date=April 28, 2007|accessdate=July 22, 2012}}</ref><ref>http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2007-January/061137.html</ref>

''The Register'' said:<ref name="theregister.co.uk"/>
:Wikipedia has tried to balance the Utopian goal of "an encyclopedia anyone can edit" with the more utilitarian goal of "a website anyone would want to read". With over a million articles, and a rulebook almost as dense, Wikipedia has demonstrated an insatiable desire to participate, create lists and generate procedures. The result is a huge silo of recorded trivia, and perhaps the world's largest, most distributed bureaucracy - mostly manned by a casual staff of teenagers and the unemployed.

For the past few years, Wikipedia has added banners begging for money from its viewers. The site claims to be in need of more funding, but in fact it is "awash with cash - and raises far more money each year than it needs to keep operating."<ref>[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/12/20/cash_rich_wikipedia_chugging/ Wikipedia doesn't need your money - so why does it keep pestering you?], 20 December 2012</ref>

Wikipedia, a registered trademark of Wikimedia Foundation, is used also by services like WikiExperts.us, which is declared as not being affiliated with it.
WikiExperts.us accepts money to write Wikipedia entries for businesses and is included in American business ventures of Alex Konanykhin, the Former Russian oligarch, who has been wanted in Russia since Yeltsin’s days to face charges relating to embezzlement and financial fraud.<ref>{{cite web |title='Not terrorists': Hysteria over MH17 fails to take account of both law and facts |author=Roslyn Fuller |date=July 25, 2014 |accessdate=July 26, 2014 |url=http://rt.com/op-edge/175496-hysteria-mh17-ukraine-facts-terrorists/}}</ref>

==Scandals and decline==

[[Image:Wikipedia scandals.jpg|thumb|450px|right|Decline in Wikimedia Foundation donations.<ref>[http://centiare.com/Wikipedia_scandals Wikipedia scandals]. Retrieved from centiare.com October 10, 2007.</ref> Graph courtesy [http://www.centiare.com/Directory:Gregory_J._Kohs Gregory Kohs]. Used with Permission.]]The cumulative effect of multiple scandals and revelations has led to declining activity on the English Wikipedia. The rate of new account creation peaked in early 2007 and has declined ~30% since. Overall editing activity showed a steady decline beginning in February 2007. An independent analysis reported, "The rate at which edits were being made to Wikipedia articles appears to have peaked in February to April 2007 and declined since. This decline is unprecedented in Wikipedia's history.... Though it may be purely coincidental, this time frame also corresponds to the Essjay controversy appearing in the press."<ref>[http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2007-October/033661.html Statistical Decline of the English Wikipedia], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dragons_flight/Log_analysis Dragons flight/Log analysis], October 9, 2007.</ref>

Even after the hoax was revealed of high level intimates promoted by the Wikimedia Foundation as experts in fields that they were not, to persuade college professors to allow students to cite Wikipedia as a reliable source, and entrusted with the ability to invade users privacy which could affect, in their words, "life and death," Wikipedia still appealed to students with a Jim and Tammy Faye Baker-style fundraising slogan across one million project space pages that read, "OMG! Wikipedia is gone! I’ll flunk my exams!" [http://whygive.wikimedia.org/2007/11/24/omg-wikipedia-is-gone-ill-flunk-my-exams/]

Further evidence of the decline in Wikipedia is that the number of editors who voted in the 2012 Arbitration Committee elections has dropped to 858.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2012#Turnout|title=Arbitration Commitee Elections December 2012|accessdate=December 18, 2012}}</ref> For a website that claims to have thousands of active editors, this is very low. Active editors are discouraged from voting because all voters are subject to automatic investigation and invasion of their privacy to determine if they are "sockpuppets" of other voters.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.examiner.com/article/wikipedia-s-scrutineers-snoop-on-living-arrangements-of-contributors|title=Wikipedia's "scrutineers" snoop on living arrangements of contributors|work=Examiner|first=Greg|last=Kohs|date=December 11, 2013|accessdate=December 15, 2014}}</ref>

==Shane Fitzgerald Hoax==

After the death of composer [[Maurice Jarre]], a Wikipedia editor named Shane Fitzgerald attached a quote to Jarre's page: "One could say my life itself has been one long soundtrack. Music was my life, music brought me to life, and music is how I will be remembered long after I leave this life. When I die there will be a final waltz playing in my head, that only I can hear."<ref>http://hoaxes.org/archive/permalink/the_maurice_jarre_wikipedia_hoax/</ref> The words are poetic, yet were never spoken by Jarre, and meant to appeal to news journalists seeking information. It was cited in many newspapers as a genuine quote before its removal.<ref>http://www.nbcnews.com/id/30699302/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/t/student-hoaxes-worlds-media-wikipedia/#.WLNTW5ArLrc</ref>

Had Fitzgerald not confessed to the lie and informed major newspapers, it is likely that the quote would have been cited to one of them. In the days following, only one newspaper (''[[The Guardian]]'') publicly apologized for the use of a source that can be a tool for duping the public.<ref>https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/may/04/journalism-obituaries-shane-fitzgerald</ref> Other newspapers, such as the [[Washington Post]], simply deleted their articles from online archives.

==False claim about Brent Bozell==

In March 2007, Brent Bozell described this falsehood in Wikipedia:<ref>http://www.creators.com/opinion/brent-bozell/not-your-father-s-encyclopedia.html</ref>

:The other day, Bernie Goldberg emailed me, upset. He pointed me to his Wikipedia entry. To read what was written was to conclude that apparently I must hate his guts. But we are friends. He is a man for whom I have profound respect, professional and personal. He knew there was foul play.

:Right there on the screen, under the heading "Criticism," it stated that I had attacked him, "claiming that Goldberg merely lifted material he had been producing for years, and only published the book because he had an ax to grind with his former employers and was attempting to make a 'quick buck,' noting that Goldberg never mentioned the alleged liberal bias of the media until it was 'convenient' and 'profitable' for him to do so." ...

:In fact, those words have never been uttered by me. The accusation would be false. Back in 1996, Goldberg used the op-ed pages of The Wall Street Journal publicly to castigate his own network for its one-sided oafish bashing of Steve Forbes. It was anything but "convenient" or "profitable" for him. It ruined his friendship with Dan Rather and put him on a path to the outer fringes of CBS "News. Ultimately, it ruined his newscaster career.

:My attorney contacted Wikipedia by email demanding the removal of this false entry. No response. So we edited out the offensive material ourselves, after which in writing counsel alerted Wikipedia to the legal action that might befall them should this be repeated. Here's full disclosure, Wikipedia-style: You can see how each article is altered, sometimes hour by hour, in its "History" section. But there is no mention of the attorney's complaints. In the Goldberg article's history, an editor simply now scolds: "Bozell's article is a mock-jealous swipe at Goldberg's opportunism. PLEASE REREAD IT." (Capitals theirs.)

:Goldberg and I are not alone. The website Conservapedia.com has a [[Bias in Wikipedia|long list]] of 41 allegations of bias and factual errors at Wikipedia. You can add to that the problem with the credentials of its staff. One of its editors, named only "Essjay" online and described on his user profile "as a tenured professor of religion at a private university with expertise in canon law," was recently exposed as a 24-year-old college kid in Kentucky. He resigned in disgrace — even though Wikipedia tried to retain him, claiming he'd edited thousands of articles with flair.

Instead of apologizing to Brent Bozell, '''Wikipedia instead says "Bozell points to Conservapedia as a resource that documents Wikipedia's faults in this regard, presumably holding it as a more authoritative reference less vulnerable to vandalism."'''<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brent_Bozell accessed April 1, 2007</ref>

==Rewriting its own history==

The Associated Press and others credit Larry Sanger as the co-founder of Wikipedia.<ref>http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/tech/2007/mar/25/032502465.html
</ref> But the Associated Press quotes Jimmy Wales as denying it:<ref>''id.''</ref>

:"When you write this up please do not uncritically repeat Sanger's absurd claim to be the co-founder of Wikipedia."

:"I know of no one who was there at the company at the beginning who would think it anything other than laughable," he added. This is an interesting comment, considering that Larry Sanger takes credit for coining the name, "Wikipedia."<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales/Archive_20#Sorry.2C_Jimbo.2C_but_not_buying_it. User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive 20, Larry Sanger 03:26, 5 March 2007 (UTC)]</ref>

:"I am not bent out of shape about it," he wrote. "The facts are on my side, which is why I bother so little about it."

According to the Associated Press, Jimmy Wales "has repeatedly tried to address this - even going so far as editing his own Wikipedia biography to tone down credit for Sanger. Such autobiographical contributions are frowned upon in Wikipedia's community, and Wales apologized after his changes were noticed and publicized by blogger Rogers Cadenhead in 2005."<ref>''id.''</ref> Wales' booking agent for speaking engagements claims that Wales is "the founder" of Wikipedia, which results in surprised clients when that claim is challenged. The false "founder" claim is on Wales' webpage.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://jimmywales.com/about-jimmy/|title=About Jimmy|accessdate=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

Jimmy Wales has admitted that certain administrators, contrary to their own rules, have at times completely removed editing evidence.

== Seigenthaler scandal ==

In early October 2005, a prominent and respected journalist [[John Seigenthaler Sr.]], contacted Wikipedia founder [[Jimmy Wales]] about false and libelous content in his biographical entry. Essjay, a 24 year old Wikipedia Administrator who was advancing rapidly in the organization, was dispatched to handle the situation.<ref name="User:Essjay/Letter">[http://www.wikitruth.info/index.php?title=User:Essjay/Letter User:Essjay/Letter]. Retrieved from WikiTruth, November 3, 2007.</ref> An anonymous contributor added to Seigenthaler's biography the previous May,
:"John Seigenthaler Sr. was the assistant to Attorney General [[Robert Kennedy]] in the early 1960s. For a short time, he was thought to have been directly involved in the Kennedy assassinations of both [[John F. Kennedy|John]], and his brother, Bobby. Nothing was ever proven," and "John Seigenthaler moved to the [[Soviet Union]] in 1971, and returned to the [[United States]] in 1984. He started one of the country's largest public relations firms shortly thereafter."

Wales told Seignethaler that Wikipedia is "accountable" and corrects mistakes immediately, but that the internet service provider of the anonymous user probably would not be helpful in identifying who placed the content.<ref name="Seigenthaler's Op-Eds">[http://www.journalism.org/node/1673 Seigenthaler's Op-Eds], October 1, 2005. Retrieved from http://www.journalism.org November 12, 2007.</ref> Accountability activist [[Daniel Brandt]], a victim of a spurious biographical entry by Wikipedia Administrators, identified the place of employment of the anonymous user, and from there the person accountable was identified.<ref>http://www.journalism.cf.ac.uk/2006/online/index.php?id=parse-195-0-0-251&article=336&author=India+Camm</ref>

Seigenthaler returned to the editorial pages of ''USA Today'' from which he retired as its first editorial manager to write an Op-Ed piece critical of Wikipedia and the threat it poses to free speech due of its overt provocation of government regulation, its irresponsible self-regulation and lack of accountability.<ref>[http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2005-11-29-wikipedia-edit_x.htm A false Wikipedia 'biography'], By John Seigenthaler, ''USA Today'', 11/29/2005.</ref>

=== CNN interview ===

On December 5, 2005 Wales and Seigenthaler appeared on [[CNN]]. An exchange between CNN moderator [[Kyra Phillips]] and Wales went like this:
{{Cquote|PHILLIPS:...I ran my name. I was shocked to see what was under my name. ...I'm telling you right now, Jimmy, that's not how I want people to see me and understand me. And what I'm about and what I write about in my interviews, et cetera. So, you know, it's not just individuals like John, but me and many other people, that just have concerns that this is creating gossip that can be very harmful. And people go to these sites thinking that this is the truth.}}
{{Cquote|WALES: Well, I mean, I think the real key is that the site matures over time, the -- all of the articles are edited over and over and over, and improved. Anyone's free to contribute. You're free to go and contribute.}}

This in fact is not the case. Phillips was not free to remove objectionable content within her biographical entry, as Daniel Brandt at that exact moment was discovering. Not four days prior, Wales told ''Editor & Publisher'' magazine regarding Brandt's objections to a false Wikipedia biography created by Wikipedia Administrators about him, "I find it hard to take him very seriously at all," and libelous slanders remained in Brandt's biography for a year and half. Wales told CNN, "we are very, very responsive to complaints and concerns."

Seigenthaler told the audience "with accountability comes credibility" and expressed fear that, "I'm afraid we're going to get regulated media as a result."<ref>http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0512/05/lol.02.html</ref>

On December 9, Seigenthaler appeared on C-SPAN's ''Washington Journal'' with Brian Lamb and articulated his concern that members of Congress or other powerful figures in government may likewise be targeted. On November 2, 2006, days before the mid-term Congressional elections, an anonymous IP address traced to the ''[[New York Times]]'' changed [[U.S. House of Representatives]] [[Majority Leader]] [[Tom DeLay]]'s Wikipedia biographical entry from "a prominent member of the [[Republican Party]]" to "Grand Dragon of the Republican Party."<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tom_DeLay&diff=prev&oldid=85320018 Wikipedia/Tom DeLay, Revision as of 20:19, 2 November 2006, IP 199.181.174.146]</ref><ref>[http://wikiscanner.virgil.gr/name2ip.php?orgname=New+York+Times&location= WikiScanner]</ref>

Seigenthaler wrote a more expansive column in the ''The Tennessean'' after the November 30 ''USA Today'' piece appeared,
{{Cquote|a sudden stream of invective — homophobic, anti-Semitic and racist — spilled, as if from a sewer, onto the Wikipedia page under my name. ..It identified me as ...a "Nazi," "fascist-oriented" ....murderer ...there also was the profile picture of Adolf Hitler over the caption, "Press photo of Seigenthaler." The accompanying line: "He is secretly responsible for killing all the Jews." }}

=== Accountability and Section 230 ===
[[Image:Wikifascists.JPG|thumb|275px|right|From Wikipedia Watch. [http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/] The inscription reads, ''"Two wikifascists find someone without a biography."'']]
Upon his retirement from ''USA Today'', Seigenthaler founded of the First Amendment Center, an organization dedicated to a national dialogue about [[First Amendment]] rights and values. Seigenthaler criticized passage of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. Section 230 states that "no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker." Unlike print and broadcast companies, internet service providers (ISP's) cannot be sued for disseminating defamatory attacks on citizens posted by others. Seigenthaler noted [[Jimbo Wales]] told [[Brian Lamb]] in a [[C-Span]] interview that Wikipedia is accountable and that mistakes are corrected within minutes, but the false information remained in Seigenthaler's biography for five months. Seigenthaler concluded,
{{Cquote|And so we live in a universe of new media with phenomenal opportunities for worldwide communications and research — but populated by volunteer vandals with poison-pen intellects.<ref>A false Wikipedia 'biography', By John Seigenthaler, ''USA Today'', 11/29/2005.</ref>}}

In the case of ''Zeran v. AOL'', Zeran sued AOL for refusing to screen and remove defamatory messages, even after Zeran notified the ISP of their existence. The lower court ruled for the service provider and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld the decision, noting that the intent of Section 230 was to (1) remove incentives on service providers to restrict speech on the Internet and (2) encourage self-regulation by service providers.<ref>http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=916529</ref><ref>http://www.adl.org/Civil_Rights/newcyber.pdf</ref>

An American citizen who posts material on the Internet that is illegal in a foreign country could be prosecuted if he subjected himself to the jurisdiction of that country. Internet users who export material that is illegal, that is to say, post material that is accessible and illegal in some foreign countries may be subject to prosecution in that country. However, under American law, the United States will not extradite a person for engaging in a constitutionally protected activity even if that activity violates a criminal law elsewhere.<ref>http://www.rjayco.com/obrien/nazism.pdf</ref>

=== Essjay given oversight ===
:''See Main article: [[Wikipedia:The Essjay scandal]]

Essjay wrote a professor to persuade her to allow her students to use Wikipedia as a viable source of information and posted a verbatim copy of the email for others to use. Essjay stated, "I was the administrator who deleted the inappropriate revisions when Mr. Seigenthaler contacted our founder, [[Jimmy Wales]]; it is quite unfortunate that a relatively minor issue on a relatively minor figure has provided so much negative publicity.<ref name="User:Essjay/Letter"/> Seigenthaler noted in his Op-Ed piece, "The motive for the salacious stuff directed at me is reasonably obvious," and quoted some comments, "We all at Wikipedia think he (Seigenthaler) is a horrible, stupid p...k for complaining about small inaccuracies in his biography."<ref name="Seigenthaler's Op-Eds"/>

Others said, "Mr. Seigenthaler's attitude and actions are reprehensible and ill-formed," and “if there is an error whether large or small, he can correct it.” This again, was not true. Even prior to the Wikipedia policy, '''Biographies of Living Persons''', [[conflict of interest]] restrictions existed on the subject of an article editing their own entry. Another wrote: "Rather than fixing the article himself, he made a legal threat."<ref>http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/02/12/bias_sabotage_haunt_wikipedias_free_world/?page=3</ref>
[[Image:Seigraph.gif|400px|thumb|right|The Seigenthaler scandal was viewed as "the best thing that ever happened to Wikipedia" as curiosity seekers to view the [[misinformation]] skyrocketed Alexa rankings.]]
Despite the damage to an innocent person and divulgence of Wikipedia's precarious claim as a viable source, the Seigenthaler scandal was viewed as a triumph and considered "the best thing that ever happened to Wikipedia,"<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:John_Seigenthaler,_Sr.#The_best_thing_that_ever_happened_to_Wikipedia Talk:John Seigenthaler Sr.#The best thing that ever happened to Wikipedia], retrieved 23 March 2007.</ref> catapulting it into a top ten most visited website as curiosity seekers responded to the negative publicity.<ref>[http://wikipediareview.com/lofiversion/index.php?t1100.html Wikipedia: A Nightmare Of Libel and Slander], Joel Leyden, Israel News Agency, 8 May 2006.</ref>

The scandal was originally billed as a "hoax", then "controversy," then downgraded to "incident," and now re-upgraded to "controversy," evidently in response to criticism. The Wikipedia entry on "Seigenthaler controversy" contains [[disinformation]], making the claim, "After the incident, Wikipedia took steps to prevent a recurrence, including barring unregistered users from creating new pages." No actions were ever taken to require disclosure of the real life identities of contributors. Barring unregistered users from creating new pages had nothing to do with the Seigenthaler scandal—the page already existed when an anonymous IP added the false information. Registration of accounts requires no accountability of the real life identity of the contributor. Indeed, many experienced Wikipedia editors and Administrators have dozens of registered accounts, called "sockpuppet accounts." Protecting the identities of anonymous high-level Administrators has always been more of a priority to the WikiMedia Foundation than the propagation of false information about real life persons whose identities are known. Wales was asked by ''BusinessWeek'' magazine, “Why do you feel it is important to allow contributors and site administrators to remain anonymous?” Wales responded, “there are definitely people working in Wikipedia who may have privacy reasons for not wanting their name on the site….there are lots of reasons for privacy online that aren’t nefarious.”<ref>http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/dec2005/tc20051214_441708.htm</ref> In the Seigenthaler case, it was the odd circumstance that a victim of false information had a large enough platform to respond, coupled with the welcome fact that the victim fundamentally opposes government regulation of internet speech.

Wikipedia's "Seigenthaler controversy" also states, "The Foundation added a new level of "oversight" features to the MediaWiki software,[12] accessible as of 2006 to around 20 experienced editors nominated by Wales,"<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Seigenthaler_Sr._Wikipedia_biography_controversy#Wikimedia_Foundation_reaction Seigenthaler controversy#Wikimedia Foundation reaction].</ref> one of whom was Essjay.

This ban on anonymous page creation “reform” was abandoned less than two years later as Wikipedia's usage and ratings slumped in the wake of yet more scandals and questions about Wikipedia's culture, core content policies, and endemic lack of accountability.<ref>http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2007-October/084292.html</ref>

==Brandt / Berlet feud==
:''See Main article: [[Wikipedia:The Daniel Brandt controversy]]
An ugly far-left sectarian dispute<ref>[http://spencer.lib.ku.edu/exhibits/wilcox/5.html Laird Wilcox], ''The Watchdogs: A Close Look at Anti-Racist "Watchdog" Groups'', Second Edition, Part 2, Editorial Research Service, 1999, p. 21. ISBN 0-993592-96-5.</ref> reared its head in 2005 with disastrous consequences for the site's credibility. The feud had been dormant for many years until the need to elevate a “controversial and notable expert” above the level of “partisan and extreme” defined by its own policies became apparent which would have precluded the so-called “expert” as "a source for anything other than himself,” as Wikipedia's ever fluid policies dictate.

Daniel Brandt, founder of Namebase,<ref>http://www.namebase.org/</ref> Google Watch, and Wikipedia Watch, removed [[Chip Berlet]] from his Board of Advisors in 1991 when Berlet refused to sit on the same Board which included Fletcher Prouty." Prouty, a retired Air Force colonel whose intelligence career stretched back to accompanying President [[Franklin Roosevelt]] to the [[Teheran conference]], was allegorically portrayed as the mysterious “Man X”<ref>[http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/lfprouty.htm Leroy Fletcher Prouty, Jr., Colonel, United States Air Force], [[Arlington National Cemetery]] Website, Retrieved November 4, 2007.</ref> by [[Donald Southerland]] in [[Oliver Stone]]'s film, [[JFK]]. A Brandt biographical page was created using Berlet as the source for unsavory attacks on Brandt. Brandt describes himself as an "accountability activist"<ref>[http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2006/04/your_take_roundupbelievers_neg.html Believers, Negativists Debate Wikipedia’s Trustworthiness], by Mark Glaser, 20 April 2006. Retrieved from pbs.org October 29, 2007.</ref><ref>[http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Daniel_Brandt Wikiquote/Daniel Brandt#Sourced]</ref> and claims he originally began working with Wikipedia editors in good faith during October 2005 but any biographical information he revealed was spun against him to depict him in a negative light. Brandt states,
{{Cquote|I soon realized that it was also about Berlet, who was still bent on undermining me. Berlet was using Wikipedia as part of his political agenda, and he was successful in this.<ref>http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=5641&st=40&p=21441&mode=linear#entry21441</ref>}}
Berlet's biography underwent an extensive revision with most of the substantive NPOV criticism cut out. The revising editor commented, "I kept Daniel Brandt, not because I feel he's a credible source, but because there's so little published criticism of Berlet, that I felt I had to retain something."<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chip_Berlet&diff=prev&oldid=9161554 Chip Berlet/Talk, SlimVirgin 00:19, 7 January 2005].</ref> This is an extraordinary statement and raises the question why the same high-level Administrator and author of several of Wikipedia's core content and citation policies, including '''Wikipedia:Reliable Sources''' and '''Wikipedia:Biographies of Living Persons''' ('''BLP'''),<ref name="en.wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons&diff=31947681&oldid=31753956</ref> would use a source she did not consider credible.

===Biographies of living persons===

Wikipedia:Biographies of Living Persons (WP:BLP) policy did not come into being because of the [[Seigenthaler scandal]], but rather over the Brandt controversy, as the originating editor noted in an edit summary.<ref name="en.wikipedia.org"/> Brandt requested Wikipedia delete his biographical entry, and ceased working with editors he suspected of working to further the propagation of false information about him.

''Editor & Publisher'' magazine bills itself as the nation’s oldest trade journal serving the newspaper industry with roots dating back to 1884. Wikipedia founder [[Jimmy Wales]] responded to questions from ''Editor & Publisher'' in a prepared statement on December 1, 2005 about Daniel Brandt saying,
{{Cquote|I don't regard him as a valid source about anything at all<ref>[http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/article_brief/eandp/1/1001612839 Wikipedia Founder, Readers Respond to Seigenthaler Article], Jay DeFoore, ''Editor & Publisher'', December 01, 2005.</ref>}}

Wales comments added '''undue weight'''<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:UNDUE#Undue_weight</ref> ('''WP:UNDUE''') to criticism of Brandt when placed within his biographical entry. Brandt demanded accountability from the army of unidentified Wikipedia Administrators furthering [[Chip Berlet]]'s agenda to destroy Brandt's credibility, and elevate Berlet's own as a Wikipedia "expert."
[[Image:294577483 90fd22f5cd m.jpg|thumb|300px|right|From '''WikiTruth''', the inscription reads, 
"''The Big Bad Brandt is Gonna Getcha!'']]
Brandt became known as the scourge of the Wikipedia Admin community. WikiTruth says in its ''Brandt the Boogeyman'' entry,
{{Cquote|he dates back to a time when people would look up facts in books and would verify information without just doing a copy and paste from an AP news article and thinking they were done. He compares writing styles, he calls government agencies, and he writes letters. And when he's done, he tends to know. Or at least, he knows where he stands in terms of information. He's rather tenacious about getting stuff right.

Wikipedia, of course, doesn't do this much at all: depending on the day, they'll laud a link to a website as being absolutely useless (it's on the WEB, of course) and then the next minute link to a different website to back a "fact" up. Citing books and printed materials is often a no-go, because nobody can read the original citation, so it gets swept away as well. Really, you have no idea what's good and what's bad, and it's all one big happy soup-hug.

Therefore, guys like Daniel Brandt are horrible for Wikipedia: he researches. He finds laws that pertain to situations. He asks the tough questions that could upset the whole Wiki-cart.}}

==The Wordbomb Saga==
[[Image:Patrick byrne overstock small.jpg|thumb|right|Overstock.com CEO Patrick Byrne [http://www.overstock.com/Patrick-Byrne-and-naked-short-selling/7371/static.html]]]
One of Wikipedia’s most bitter and drawn-out disputes, chronicled in ''The Register,''<ref>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/06/wikipedia_and_overstock/</ref> centers around the assertion by representatives of Overstock.com<ref>http://www.overstock.com/community</ref> that a [[Mainstream media|mainstream financial journalist]] Gary Weiss had been editing Wikipedia to impose his point of view on a series of articles relevant to the company. Weiss was once a reporter with BusinessWeek, in 2007 became a columnist with Forbes, and had for over 10 years been posting under fake names to confuse, distort, hijack Usenet groups, stock message boards, and Wikipedia, to prevent the public from understanding criminal activity.<ref>http://www.deepcapture.com/gary-weiss-scaramouch-psychopath/</ref> Weiss was notorious around the Internet for his public feud with Overstock<ref>http://garyweiss.blogspot.com/2007/05/overstockcoms-ethical-dilemma.html</ref> and its CEO Patrick Byrne,<ref>http://allantyoung.com/2008/09/22/patrick-byrne-vindicated/</ref> ridiculing their campaign against the controversial practice of [[Naked Short Selling]].

In 2006, Judd Bagley, an ally of Overstock’s Patrick Byrne having interviewed the CEO for a personal project, began editing Wikipedia to counter what was perceived to be a skewed representation of Naked Short Selling and Overstock.com. He was swiftly dispatched by influential Wikipedia administrators.

Shortly after, Bagley became Overstock’s Director of Communications, and embarked on an aggressive campaign to publicize the dispute on various websites, aiming to expose the administrators he held responsible for protecting Weiss. Using the moniker “Wordbomb”, Bagley presented evidence<ref>http://antisocialmedia.net/final-word-on-weiss/</ref> suggesting that not only was Gary Weiss editing Wikipedia using the name “User:Mantanmoreland“,<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mantanmoreland</ref> but that he was operating other accounts to manipulate consensus and protect his interests in the dispute. Mantanmoreland violated Wikipedia policies against Conflict of Interest and No Self Promotion by creating an article about himself.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gary_Weiss&diff=prev&oldid=48341962</ref> Bagley proved Weiss had edited Wikipedia from one of two main IPs used by the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation (DTCC),<ref>http://www.dtcc.com/about/business/index.php</ref> the organization charged with settling about a quadrillion stock trades each year. The DTCC is also the organization Overstock.com CEO Patrick Byrne said acts an enabler of perpetrators of illegal naked short selling of many public companies.<ref>http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=10360&st=0&p=36485&mode=linear#entry36485</ref>

Wikipedia responded to Bagley’s campaign in typical schoolyard fashion. The dispute was escalated by a small clique of powerful Wikipedians who seemed less interested in the truth of Bagley’s assertions, and more concerned with attacking perceived threats to the status quo at Wikipedia. With the approval of [[Jimbo Wales]], administrators sided with “Mantanmoreland” / Gary Weiss, and anointed Bagley / Wordbomb an “Enemy Of The Wiki” who needed to be silenced — a “stalker” and a “harasser” for publicizing the details of the person who had been editing relevant articles on Wikipedia, and the people who had been stopping him from doing the same.

For nearly two years, Bagley’s name was invoked to inspire paranoia in the Wikipedia Admin Community to keep questioning editors in line. It became a textbook case for analysis of the intense group-think Wikipedia has become notorious for.
[[Image:Judd bagley overstock.jpg|thumb|left|175px|Judd Bagley was made a target at the highest levels of Wikipedia and became a victim of a global [[witchhunt]] by the Wikipedia Admin Community for daring to expose an unholy alliance of abuse and [[corruption]] on [[Wall Street]] and in the Wikipedia cabal. [http://antisocialmedia.net/] ]]
Bagley was repeatedly disparaged<ref>http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=15897</ref> by a cabal of out-of-control administrators such as Guy Chapman, who denounced Bagley as “lunatic” and “evil” when it suited. UK Wikimedia representative David Gerard banned an entire area of Utah to prevent Bagley raising his issues and made personally disparaging remarks.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:David_Gerard/archive_5#User:204.15.84.2</ref> Wikipedia Arbitrator Fred Bauder claimed that Bagley’s blog AntiSocialMedia.net showed “moral depravity”<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Attack_sites/Proposed_decision&diff=158954587&oldid=158809362</ref> for challenging the Wiki-elite. Administrator Phil Sandifer dismissed Bagley in highly personal and offensive language while boasting<ref>http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2007-October/083509.html</ref> that he himself had become a “powerful and trusted administrator on the 9th biggest website in the world.”

Other editors who raised Overstock’s quite legitimate complaints were banned as proxies of Judd Bagley. Paranoia had taken such a hold that editors with productive records from all over the US, and as far afield as Europe and Asia found themselves accused of being Bagley. When the editor Cla68<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence#Evidence_presented_by_Cla68</ref> questioned the issue of Gary Weiss editing Wikipedia, he was swiftly blocked by administrator Durova on the orders of Jimbo Wales who wrote,<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gary_Weiss&diff=165916446&oldid=165916313</ref> “Durova and Guy have my full support here. No nonsense, zero tolerance, shoot on sight. No kidding, this has gone on long enough”.

A study<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SirFozzie/Investigation</ref> undertaken by concerned administrators into the editing patterns of “Mantanmoreland” came to fruition. Despite the “Mantanmoreland” account ceasing edits on Overstock / Naked Short Selling articles in September 2007, the study revealed evidence beyond reasonable doubt that the same person had been operating several accounts to “control” articles. Thus affirming Bagley’s claims.

More worryingly for good faith Wikipedians was the revelation<ref>http://www.wikback.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2762#Post2757</ref><ref>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/01/wikipedia_and_naked_shorting/print.html</ref> that Jimbo Wales, alongside leading administrators, had considered that this person was almost certainly Gary Weiss in a private discussion as long ago as September 2007 (the same month the “Mantanmoreland” account quit editing the relevant articles). Meaning that behind the scenes, they were admitting that Bagley was probably right all along, yet in public were vilifying or blocking anyone who publicly stated so.

After the [[financial meltdown of 2008]], the [[Securities and Exchange Commission]] issued directives aimed at curbing abusive naked short selling.<ref>[http://www.philly.com/inquirer/business/20090728_SEC_short-selling_rule_is_permanent.html]</ref> Patrick Byrne has been widely recognized as in the forefront of the movement aimed at curbing such abuses.<ref>http://www.investigatethesec.com/drupal-5.5/?q=node/425</ref>

==Michael Moore==
[[Image:Moorecagan.JPG|right|thumb|200px|Moore with [[Leslie Cagan]] [[United For Peace and Justice]] [http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=629] ]]
The website MichaelMoore.com, dissatisfied with a Wikipedia editor's edits to ''[[Sicko]]'', published an image of a Wikipedia user on its main page. This was combined with links to edit both ''Sicko'' and the editor's user page.[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Attack_sites/Proposed_decision#Michael_Moore] Several Wikipedia editors and Administrators regarded this action on the part of [[Michael Moore]]'s official website as an egregious violation of a well publicized ruling to protect Wikipedia editors from outside harassment. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Attack_sites/Evidence#Michael_Moore][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Attack_sites/Evidence#Michael_Moore_2] The consensus, per Wikipedia's policy was to remove links from Wikipedia to Michael Moore's attack site which was urging vengeance and reprisals against an editor who posted criticism of Moore's film.

In Arbitration, Wikipedia's internal policy making and dispute resolution arm, the Arbitration chairman publicly admitted,
{{Cquote|No question it contained an attack, including a link to edit our user's page. The problem is that many of us like Michael Moore very much and don't care much for the viewpoint of the user involved. Applying our policy in a rote manner (Without consideration of '''the unwritten rule that we support prominent subjects that we like''') yields removal of the link (At least while it contained the personal attack).<ref>Wikien-1 [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2007-October/082980.html Harassment sites], Fred Bauder, Sun Oct 14 19:03:28 UTC 2007.</ref>}}

Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View (NPOV), laid down by founder Jimbo Wales allegedly is "absolute and non-negotiable."[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#_note-0] The ArbCom chairman further stated, "Obviously we need to make an exception for prominent people whose viewpoint we support." [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2007-October/082987.html] When asked, "How, then, is this remotely compatible with NPOV?", the ArbCom chairman responded, "Not at all." [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2007-October/082993.html] The editor whom Michaelmoore.com was urging its viewers to attack and harass is described as "a Fellow at the [[American Enterprise Institute]], a [[conservative]] [[think tank]]."[http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2007-October/083230.html]

==Sinbad hoax==
On March 16, 2007, Wikipedia entry on the 50-year old entertainer Sinbad, born David Adkins, states: "He succumbed to a fatal heart attack on the morning of March 14, 2007." This hoax was widely reported in the media.<ref>http://www.ioltechnology.co.za/article_page.php?iSectionId=2891&iArticleId=3734818</ref>
==Robert Clark Young revenge edits==
From 2006 to 2013, Robert Clark Young, an author who had only published one novel to mixed reviews, edited Wikipedia extensively with 13,000 edits under username "Qworty." He engaged in aggressive behavior making revenge edits to biographical articles of his rival authors and other people against whom he held grudges. He also puffed up his own Wikipedia autobiography, and repeatedly denied that he was connected to Young. He also created other single purpose accounts to further his campaign.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Geri_Litton|title=Geri Litton sockpuppet investigation|date=2007|accessdate=July 11, 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Qworty/Archive|title=Quorty sockpuppet inviestigant|date=2013|accessdate=July 11, 2013}}</ref> Only after his true identity was revealed in a salon.com article,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.salon.com/2013/05/17/revenge_ego_and_the_corruption_of_wikipedia/|title=Revenge, ego and the corruption of Wikipedia|date=May 17, 2013|work=salon.com|accessdate=July 9, 2013}}</ref> was Young banned<ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive797#User:Qworty|title=Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive797|accessdate=July 9, 2013}}</ref> and efforts made to reverse his vindictive edits. In essence, he would remove favorable items from the biographies of his enemies or nominate them for deletion. The salon.com article concluded,
<blockquote>But Qworty’s example tells us that even when people call attention to a rogue editor, even when that editor’s temper tantrums come to the attention of the founder of Wikipedia, it’s quite possible that no action will be taken.</blockquote>

==Rutgers-Ivy League hoax==
A Wikipedia entry falsely stated that Rutgers was once invited to join the Ivy League. Although that false statement was eventually removed from Wikipedia, it was not removed before the ''Daily News'' relied on it in this story:

:You don't have to define your college with your football team, but Rutgers long ago decided to give it a try. Back in 1954, when it was considered a 'public Ivy,' Rutgers might have joined the fledgling Ivy League and altered its destiny. But the school declined the offer - arguably the dumbest mistake in its history. Ever since then, Rutgers has scrambled to prove itself worthy of playing football with the big boys."<ref>Bondy, Filip. "They Can Finally Say They Belong Here", New York Daily News, 2006-11-10, p. 92. Retrieved on 2006-12-13.</ref>

==Barbara Bauer vs. Wikimedia Foundation==
Wikimedia Foundation is one of 17 defendants in a lawsuit suit filed in New Jersey, by Barbara Bauer and her literary agency. Her Wikipedia article was deleted on March 25, 2007 by Wikipedia administrator Doc Glasgow as a "bloody disgrace".<ref name="wikipedia-watch.org">http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/bauertc.html</ref><ref name="wikipedia-watch.org"/><ref>http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/bauert1.html</ref><ref>http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/bauert2.html</ref>

==GFDL License Issue==
Wikipedia's practice of complete deletion of articles<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Brian+Peppers</ref> without reference to the original article, the author(s)/publisher(s) of the article, and the history and title(s) of the article, including modification history, description and appropriate dates, is a direct violation of at least GFDL version 1.2. Additionally, the GFDL License states that if the article/document contains Copyright notices, that said notices must be preserved at all times. If those notices are removed, then they are in violation of Copyright Law, as well as the terms of the GFDL license. Furthermore, the question of them removing anything outright at all comes into quite a grey area. If one reads the GFDL License literally, then it implies that once the article document is posted, it is in distribution, and technical measures are not allowed to be taken to prevent the use of the document in question, and that no other conditions whatsoever can be added by the user to those of the GFDL license.<ref>http://www.wikitruth.info/index.php?title=Wikipocalypse:GF'DL</ref><ref>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl.html#TOC1</ref>

However, beginning June 15, 2009, the Wikimedia Foundation began transitioning content on Wikipedia to be dual licensed under both the GFDL and Creative Commons CC-BY-SA 3.0.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-06-15/News_and_notes</ref>

==Cyberbullying==
The press have reported on incidents of [[cyberbullying]] on Wikipedia.<ref name="LATimes">{{cite news| url=http://articles.latimes.com/2008/apr/29/local/me-wikipedia29 | work=Los Angeles Times | first=Molly | last=Hennessy-Fiske | title=Wikipedia threats went unchecked – Los Angeles Times | date=29 April 2008}}</ref><ref name="ABCLocal">[http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/local&id=6087243 Hacienda Heights school receives possible threat | abc7.com]</ref><ref name="LATimes2">{{cite news |title=Student arrested for violent threats on Wikipedia |first= |last= |url=http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2008/04/wiki.html?cid=6a00d8341c630a53ef011571abd811970b |work=[[Los Angeles Times]] |date=29 April 2008}}</ref> An editor threatened an Asian student at the [[Glen A. Wilson High School]] in 2008,<ref name="LATimes" /><ref name="ABCLocal" /><ref name="LATimes2" /> and a 14-year-old boy was arrested for making a threat against [[Niles West High School]] on Wikipedia in 2006.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.pantagraph.com/news/article_baef01f3-e56f-52e1-b9af-e90eb83e811b.html|title=Teen charged after threat to school on Wikipedia|date=31 October 2006|agency=Associated Press |publisher=Pantagraph.com|accessdate=26 January 2011|location=Bloomington, IL}}</ref>
== Wikipedia on bestiality ==

''See also:'' [[Wikipedia on bestiality]] and [[Atheism and bestiality]]

As noted earlier, the Wikipedia project was initiated by [[atheism|atheists]] and [[entrepreneur]] Jimmy Wales and the [[agnosticism|agnostic]] [[philosophy]] [[professor]] [[Larry Sanger]] on January 15, 2001.<ref>http://www.nndb.com/lists/288/000092012/</ref>

[[Bestiality]] is the act of engaging in sexual relations with an animal. As of July 18, 2012, Wikipedia's article on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoophilia zoophilia/bestiality] has an entire section on "arguments for zoophilia" plus pictures depicting zoophilia as well as a section on "arguments against zoophilia". As of September 24, 2011, Wikipedia has a "[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoophilia_and_the_law Zoophilia and the law"] article which has a section on the impact of zoophilia laws where eight alleged negative impacts of zoophilia laws are given, but no positive impacts of the laws are given.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoophilia_and_the_law#Impact_of_laws|title=Impact of laws section of "Zoopilia and the law"|date=July 17, 2012|accessdate=July 18, 2012}}</ref>

See also: [[Atheism and bestiality]] and [[Evolutionary belief and bestiality]]
== Trademarks and domain names ==
The Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) uses the licensing of its trademarks as a tool to control local chapters. Although each local chapter is in theory an autonomous organization, each chapter signs an contract with the WMF as a condition for using its trademarks. The WMF also tried to stake out control over many domain names that contain the word "wiki" including "[[wikileaks]]". WikiLeaks and Wikipedia have no affiliation with each other. ("Wiki" describes a type of website and is not a trademark.)<ref>{{cite web |url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiLeaks_is_not_part_of_Wikipedia |title=Wikipedia:WikiLeaks is not part of Wikipedia |work=Wikipedia |publisher=[[Wikimedia Foundation]] |accessdate=September 17, 2012}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/online/wiki-giants-on-a-collision-course-over-shared-name-2065561.html |title=Wiki giants on a collision course over shared name |last1=Rawlinson |first1=Kevin |first2=Tom |last2=Peck |date=30 August 2010 |work=The Independent |location=London |accessdate=September 17, 2012}}</ref> Wikia did purchase several WikiLeaks-related domain names (including wikileaks.com and wikileaks.net) as a "protective brand measure" in 2007.<ref name=wikia>{{cite web |url=http://www.wikia.com/Press:Wikia_Does_Not_Own_Wikileaks_Domain_Names |title=Press:Wikia Does Not Own Wikileaks Domain Names |work=[[Wikia]] |publisher=[[Wikia]] |accessdate=September 17, 2012}}</ref> Wikia started to transfer those domain names to wikileaks on June 14, 2007, but the transfer was never completed, and Wikia held those domain names when the "Wikileaks scandal" broke.<ref name=wikia/>

== Humorous quotes concerning Wikipedia ==

"...dealing with the Wikipedians is like walking into a mental hospital: the floors are carpeted, the walls are nicely padded, but you know there’s a pretty good chance at any given moment one of the inmates will pick up a knife.” - quote from a ''[[New York Times]]'' article on Wikipedia written by the journalist and author Judith Newman<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/09/fashion/Wikipedia-Judith-Newman.html?smid=pl-share Wikipedia-Mania: Wikipedia, What Does Judith Newman Have to Do to Get a Page?]</ref>

An article entitled ''Wikipedia Gridlocked by Wikipedia Nerds'' declared:
{{Cquote|So who are these Gatekeepers to all the internet's knowledge?

A survey the foundation conducted last year determined that the average age of an editor is 26.8 years, and that 87% of them are men.

As you suspected: [[nerd]]s.<ref>http://gawker.com/5410917/wikipedia-gridlocked-by-wikipedia-nerds</ref>}}

Jimmy Wales said the typical profile of a Wikipedia contributor is "a 26-year-old geeky male" who moves on to other ventures, gets married and leaves the website.<ref>[http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/digital-living/5397593/Wikipedia-losing-contributors-founder-says Wikipedia losing contributors, founder says]</ref>

Seth Meyers noted on his ''Late Night'' program, "Wikipedia is now accepting donations using the online currency Bitcoin. So now you can support information you're not sure is true with currency you're not sure is money."<ref>http://www.thespec.com/living-story/4733681-tuesdayfile/ Retrieved August 8, 2014</ref>

When obscure author [[Patrick Modiano]] was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in October 2014, few journalists knew much about him. The person updating his Wikipedia biography to reflect the prize added this warning to the article, "To the Reporter Now Copying From Wikipedia: Be careful boy. Primary sources are still best for journos."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2014/10/09/nobel_prize_winner_patrick_modiano_s_wikipedia_page_changed_to_add_note.html|title=A Reminder to Journalists Writing About the New Nobel Prize Winner, From Wikipedia|first=Forrest |last=Wickman|date=October 9, 2014|work=Slate|accessdate=October 10, 2014}}</ref><ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Patrick_Modiano&diff=prev&oldid=628920987</ref>
==Unbiased editor recruitment==
Wikipedia claims that anyone can edit it. That is true to an extent,but its editor pool is self-selecting. However, on January 25–29, 2012, the Wikimedia Foundation paid for Gregory Varnum and others to attend and staff a booth at the "24th National Conference on LGBT Equality: Creating Change" conference in Baltimore, Maryland. The purpose of the Wikimedia booth was to recruit more LGBT activists to edit Wikipedia. Although Wikimedia has outreach efforts at other conferences, there has been no outreach at conservative events. Another issue is the fact many conservatives do not use Wikipedia instead using Conservapedia or other less biased internet encyclopedias.

Wikipedia editor [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch Sarah Stierch] was the volunteer moderator of the Gender Gap email list where she departed from discussing Wikipedia to freely share her negative experiences with men in her life. In fall 2011, she was hired by the WMF as a Community Fellow to work on creating a "Teahouse" for newer Wikipedia editors. The report on the Teahouse Pilot Project<ref>{{cite web|url=http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Research:Teahouse/Pilot_Report&oldid=3832292|title=Teahouse: Pilot Report|date=June 14, 2012}}</ref> explained, "If you click through to the Teahouse, it’s clearly aiming to broaden female participation - just look at the pastel background and references to tea." Stierch tried to use Twitter to recruit more female editors into Teahouse and the English Wikipedia. The report concluded, "Because so much time and energy needed to be spend during the pilot on setting up and maintaining the space, we weren't able to focus as much as we'd have liked on gender-targeted strategies for recruiting female guests and hosts. There are clearly more experiments that need to be run in order to better integrate the space with other gender gap efforts and WikiWomen's calls to actions." The WMF terminated Stierch on January 9, 2014 following complaints of her moonlighting as a paid editor.<ref>http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2014-January/129466.html</ref>

On August 18, 2014, during the Congressional summer recess, the [[Cato Institute]] and Wikimedia DC jointly conducted a seminar to encourage Congressional staff members to edit Wikipedia about pending legislation and policy issues.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/08/18/a-call-to-edit-congress-and-wikipedia-told-to-peacefully-co-exist/|title=A call to edit: Congress and Wikipedia told to peacefully co-exist|first=Nancy|last=Scola|date=August 18, 2014|accessdate=August 22, 2014|work=Washington Post}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.c-span.org/video/?321030-1/discussion-wikipedia-government-transparency|date=August 18, 2014|accessdate=August 22, 2014|title=Wikipedia and Congress|work=C-SPAN}}</ref> The panel discussion included Michelle Newby, a full-time Cato employee who edits Wikipedia as a part of her job. She promised to work with any Congressional Staff that would be interested in editing.

==Flaws in governance structure==
Perhaps Wikipedia's greatest structural problem is Jimmy Wales' inability to remove himself from the process. He calls himself a "God-King" and rules the site with the style of [[monarchy]], robbing it of its potential to achieve some form of [[Jeffersonian]] [[democracy]] and accountability. Wales once speculated that all significant productivity emerged from his circle of a few hundred personal friends while the rest of the world groped along doing only spelling and punctuation mark corrections and other trivial modifications. The computer programmer and activist Aaron Swartz did a proper analysis and showed that the productivity was the results of many, many thousands of anonymous users. Swartz later committed [[suicide]].

Wales delegated the run-of-the-mill decision-marking to a hand-picked group he called the Arbitration Committee. They take months to make any decisions and dole out multi-month to multi-year or permanent intervention solutions. A reputable encyclopedia usually simply chooses an Editor-in-Chief, i.e. one reputable, mature and experienced person with one mind to make high-quality decisions rapidly and perhaps dispense moderate penalties when needed. Sanger served as such, but Wales, an [[Objectivist]] economics major and former stock options trader, opted to drastically reduce his salary when it became clear that the project would be a success, thus forcing him out. Wales has since been making a living, in part, by promoting his notions of governance of Internet-based projects, often emphasizing that users should remain anonymous and thus without any serious form of credential or reputation.

The problems are in the structure and in the personality flaws of Wales himself. Wales takes advantage of this vast pool of free labor to hunt his perceived enemies, somewhat in the style of [[L. Ron Hubbard]] or other such supposed founders of movements.{{fact}}

==See also ==
*[[Examples of Bias in Wikipedia]]
*[[Previous Breaking News/Wikipedia|Articles about '''Wikipedia''' from previous "Breaking News"]]
*[[Essay:The Protocols of Ritual Defamation]]
*[[Wikipedia prejudice and KAL 007]] (Wikipedia deletion material related to [[New World Order]] and [[Larry McDonald]], touching [[Korean Airlines Flight 007]])
*[[Deletionpedia]]
*[[Essay:Wikipedia and Citizendium]]

==Further reading==
*[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/aug/21/conservatives-miss-wikipedias-threat/ SHEFFIELD: Conservatives miss Wikipedia's threat] by [[Washington Times]], August 21, 2008
*[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/06/wikipedia_and_overstock/print.html Wikipedia black helicopters circle Utah's Traverse Mountain], By Cade Metz, ''The Register'', 6 December 2007.
*[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/06/15/wikipedia_can_damage_your_grades/ Avoid Wikipedia, warns Wikipedia chief - It can seriously damage your grades] by Andrew Orlowski, ''The Register'', June 15, 2006
*[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10/18/wikipedia_quality_problem/ Wikipedia founder admits to serious quality problems] by Andrew Orlowski, ''The Register'', October 18, 2005
*[http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/whowriteswikipedia Who Writes Wikipedia?] by Aaron Swartz, 2006
*[http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/07/05/wikipedias-seven-worst-moments/ Wikipedia’s Seven Worst Moments] by Charlie Nash, ''Breitbart News'', July 5, 2016.

==References==
{{reflist|3}}

==External links==
*[http://www.wikipedia.org Wikipedia]
*[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2013/01/2013-is-starting-off-to-be-bad-year-for.html Study shows that the world's biggest pro-evolution website is driving away newcomer editors! Also, video shows evolutionists at Wikipedia are clowns!]
*[http://www.wikipediocracy.com Wikipediocracy]
*[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedia_controversies Wikipedia's List of Wikipedia controversies]
*[http://www.mises.org/story/2704 Wikipedia: What Is It Good For?], By Dick Clark, 9/19/2007. Retrieved from The Ludwig von Mises Institute, http://www.mises.org/ November 5, 2007.
{{Liberalism}}
[[Category:Wikis]]
[[Category:Featured articles]]
[[Category:Encyclopedias]]
[[Category:Wikipedia|Wikipedia]]
[[Category:Wikimedia Foundation]]

Category:Affirmative Action

2017-03-22T17:03:15Z

ChristopherW: Adding category racism

[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Racism]]

Moon

2017-03-22T16:49:48Z

ChristopherW: Atheistic "science" is not science but pseudoscience as it denies the existence of the Lord. An essential component of many scientific theories such as intelligent design etc.

{{Planet|image=Moon2.jpg
|caption= The Moon in its third quarter phase
|primary=Earth
|periapsis=363,300 km<ref name=moonfact>"[http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/factsheet/moonfact.html Moon Fact Sheet]," [[NASA]], April 19, 2007. Accessed May 3, 2008.</ref>
|apoapsis=405,500 km<ref name=moonfact/>
|semimajor=384,400 km<ref name=moonfact/><ref name=ssdorbit>"[http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/?sat_elem Planetary Satellite Mean Orbital Parameters]." [[Jet Propulsion Laboratory|JPL]], [[National Aeronautics and Space Administration|NASA]]. Accessed March 25, 2008.</ref>
|orbitradius=378,000 km
|eccentricity=0.0549<ref name=moonfact/><ref name=ssdorbit/>
|sidereal=27.3217 da
|synodic=29.530588 da
|orbitspeed=1.023 km/s
|inclination=18.28°<ref name=moonfact/>
|siderealday=27.3217 da<ref name=moonfact/><ref name=ssdorbit/>
|solarday=29.530588 da
|mass=7.35 * 1022 (1.23% earth)<ref name=moonfact/>
|density=3350 kg/m³<ref name=ssdphys>"[http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/?sat_phys_par Planetary Satellite Physical Parameters]." [[Jet Propulsion Laboratory|JPL]], [[National Aeronautics and Space Administration|NASA]]. Accessed March 25, 2008.</ref>
|surfacegrav=1.62 m/s² (0.165 ''g'')<ref name=moonfact/>
|escapespeed=2.38 km/s<ref name=moonfact/>
|meanradius=1737.1 km<ref name=moonfact/><ref name=ssdphys/>
|equatorradius =1738.1 km<ref name=moonfact/>
|polarradius =1736.0 km<ref name=moonfact/>
|surfacearea=37,919,000 km² (7.434% earth)
|mintemp=100 K
|meantemp=250 K
|maxtemp=400 K
|albedo=0.12<ref name=moonfact/>
|pmdm=1.3 * 1015 N-m/T<ref name=Humphreys>Humphreys, D. R. "[http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/21/21_3/21_3.html The Creation of Planetary Magnetic Fields]." ''Creation Research Society Quarterly'' 21(3), December 1984. Accessed April 29, 2008.</ref>
|cmdm=1.73 * 1022 N-m/T<ref name=Humphreys/>
|mdt=364 a<ref name=Humphreys/>
|mhl=252.3 a<ref name=calc>Calculated</ref>
}}A '''moon''' is a body which orbits a [[planet]]. The Earth's Moon (sometimes known as "Luna") is a natural [[satellite]] orbiting Earth at an average distance of about 238,000 miles (380,000 km).

The Moon is unique in the solar system in its large relative size compared with the [[Earth]]. The Moon appears from the Earth to be the same size as the [[sun]], in perfect artistic symmetry, unlike any known other planet-moon system. Moreover, unlike most planets in the [[solar system]], [[Earth]] has only one moon. And the Moon has two more remarkable artistic attributes: (1) it rotates and revolves in a way such that only one side is ever visible to the Earth (due to tidal locking) and (2) its side that faces the Earth is smooth, while the side that remains hidden is jagged. To those on Earth the Moon appears as an artistic disc that goes through phases in which greater or lesser amounts of the side lit by the sun are visible from Earth.

[[Pseudoscience|Atheistic "science"]] has proposed a number of naturalistic theories to explain the [[Origin of the Moon]], including a second planet colliding with [[Earth]] or even a second moon colliding with the first.<ref>http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/08/03/earth-once-had-second-moon-astronomers-say/?test=faces</ref> '''''None of these atheistic theories of origin is plausible'''''. The Bible explains that the Moon was created separately on Day Four along with the Sun and stars.

==The Moon as God's creation==

The Earth's moon has several striking characteristics. To many Christians, these characteristics appear as "clues" or "hints" left by God for men to discover.<ref>http://www.math.nus.edu.sg/aslaksen/gem-projects/hm/0102-1-phase/CALENDARS.htm</ref>

===Size of its disc===

The Moon appears to have approximately the same size as the [[Sun]] when viewed from Earth. This creates a unique symmetry and phenomenal [[solar eclipse]]s.
The Moon is just far enough away from the Earth to appear the same size of the Sun. In precise terms, the ratio of the apparent diameter of the Moon to that of the Sun is on average 0.97<ref name="creationresearch.org">http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/35/astrodesign.html</ref> with a variation (due almost entirely to the [[orbital eccentricity|eccentricity]] of the Moon's orbit) of roughly ±0.05.<ref>http://www.fourmilab.ch/earthview/moon_ap_per.html</ref>

Of the known satellites in the [[Solar System]], only three others exhibit the phenomenon of being close in apparent size to the Sun when viewed from their parent planet. These are [[Saturn]]'s moons Prometheus and Epimetheus (with average diameter ratios of 1.03 and 0.95) and [[Uranus]]'s Cordelia (1.08).<ref name="creationresearch.org"/> Given the figure of approximately 170 known planetary satellites in the Solar System (though the figure regularly increases with new discoveries), this gives as an [[Probability|empirical probability]] for the phenomenon of 4/170 or 2.4%, which is not inconsistent with the theoretical figure.

It should be noted, however, that by virtue of the planets' distance form the Sun, these eclipses would appear very small in the sky, and would be nothing like as spectacular as a total solar eclipse on Earth.

===Rotation and revolution===

The Moon presents the same side to Earth at all times. That means that the rotation of the Earth offsets the separate effects of lunar revolution. Physical explanations rely on [[tidal locking]], asserting that tidal forces on Earth caused a bulge on the Moon, thereby creating a drag on the rotation of the Moon until the same side always faced the Earth.<ref>The same theory suggested that the planet [[Mercury]] had a similar locked rotation due to gravitational forces from the sun, such that the same side of Mercury always faces the sun. In fact, that is false. [[Mercury]]'s tidal locking is incomplete and it does not always present the same face to the sun.</ref> In fact, current tidal forces exerted by the Earth on the Moon cannot account fully for its bulge or egg shape.<ref>"[http://physics.fortlewis.edu/Astronomy/astronomy%20today/CHAISSON/AT308/HTML/AT30803.HTM Chapter 8, Section 3: The Rotation of the Moon]," "Astronomy Today", Department of Physics, Fort Lewis College, Durango, [[Colorado|CO]]. Accessed February 18, 2008</ref>

===Lunar origin theories===

The current scientific consensus is that the Moon originated from a collision early in Earth's history which created an orbiting ring of debris from the [[iron]]-poor surface of the planet which eventually coalesced into the moon.<ref>http://www.astronomy.com/asy/default.aspx?c=a&id=2198</ref>

Biblical history records the Moon being created on the fourth day of [[creation week]], along with the Sun:

{{Bible quote|And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: [he made] the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that [it was] good. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.|book=Genesis|chap=1|verses=14-19|version=KJV}}

===Rate of recession===

The Moon currently recedes from the Earth at a rate of 1.5 inches (3.8 cm) per year,<ref>NASA [http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/SEhelp/ApolloLaser.html Measuring the Moon's Distance], LPI Bulletin, No. 72, August, 1994.</ref> and is believed by [[atheist]]ic scientists to be 4.6 billion years old,<ref>NASA, [http://history.nasa.gov/SP-350/ch-15-2.html Apollo Expeditions to the Moon], Chapter 15.2.</ref> The Moon could never have been closer than about 11,000 miles or it would have been broken up by tidal forces.<ref name="js">Sarfati, Jonathan, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/764/ The moon: the light that rules the night], ''Creation'' 20(4):36–39, September 1998.</ref> If the rate of recession stayed constant at 3.8 cm per year, it would take 9.6 billion years for the lunar distance to migrate from 11,000 miles to the present distance of about 240,000 miles. However these assumptions are very inaccurate as the rate of recession would definitely not be constant over the past 4 billion years. 

===Impact craters===
Astronomers assume that crater impacts are a reliable indicator of the age of a celestial body. True to the form and principles of [[uniformitarianism]] (as applied to [[astronomy]] rather than to [[geology]]), any such estimation relies upon uniform constants and weather/erosion trends. Recent research into crater impacts on the moon suggests that many of the assumptions previously made are unwarranted. Bonnie Buratti of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory has asserted that space weathering "takes place very rapidly on the Moon."<ref>David, Leonard. "[http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/lunar_impact_021214.html Lunar Crash of 1953: Impact Crater Identified]." <http://www.space.com>, December 14, 2002. Accessed January 16, 2008.</ref> Peter Brown of the University of Western Ontario insists that there is no absolute criteria for the dating of craters.<ref>Hecht, Jeff. "[http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3242 New crater revives Moon mystery]." <http://www.newscientist.com>, January 11, 2003. Accessed January 16, 2008.</ref>

===Creationist models===
Danny Faulkner of the [[Institute for Creation Research]] has observed that many of the lunar maria contain ''ghost craters'', or craters that the lava flow that produced the maria seem to have filled only partially. In the [[deep time]] scale required by [[uniformitarianism]], the ghost craters are the result of impacts that occurred as much as half a gigayear before the crust-fracturing impacts that caused the lava flows.<ref name=Henderson>Henderson, Thomas H. "[http://www.hal-pc.org/~tom/HeavyCratering.html Do heavily cratered planets and moons demand an old age for the solar system]?" ''Tom Henderson's Creation Resources'', July 25, 2003. Accessed March 25, 2008.</ref> This is not a reasonable assumption, because any impact strong enough to crack the crust should have obliterated any craters previously extant. Faulkner thus concludes that the impacts that formed the ghost craters, and those that let loose the lava flows that formed the maria, occurred within days of one another<ref name=Faulkner1>Faulkner, Danny. "[http://www.icr.org/research/index/researchp_df_r01/ The Current State of Creation Astronomy]." ''Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Creationism,'' Creation Science Fellowship, Pittsburgh, pp. 201–216, August 3–8, 1998. Hosted at ''[[Institute for Creation Research]].'' Accessed March 25, 2008.</ref> and were probably part of at least one system-wide catastrophe involving a narrow stream of meteoroids and/or comets that delivered a concentrated bombardment of the Earth and Moon in a short interval.<ref name=Faulkner2>Faulkner, Danny. "[http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/1637 A Biblically-based cratering theory]." ''Technical Journal'' (now ''Journal of Creation''), 13(1):100-104, April 1999.</ref>

Faulkner assumes that this system-wide catastrophe occurred during the year of the [[Great Flood]]. But in 1984, Russell Humphreys, then at the Sandia National Laboratories, developed evidence suggesting different dates entirely. Specifically, the [[Project Apollo]] exploration teams brought back many samples of [[basalt]] (an [[igneous rock]]) and [[brecchia]] (pulverized meteor-impact remains). Geologists analyzed both types of samples and found evidence that each type of rock had once been in a magnetic field far more powerful than that which the Moon has today. Using his model for the creation and decay of magnetic fields,<ref name=Humphreys/> Humphreys determined that the basalt had been laid down about 370 years after creation, and the brecchia had been laid down 1840 years after creation, or about 190 years after the Flood.<ref name=Humphreys2>Humphreys reasoned that the higher the magnetic dipole moment of the samples, the earlier in lunar history they were formed.</ref> These findings clearly suggest that the Moon, and presumably all other bodies in the solar system, have been subject to two separate system-wide bombardments, one occurring in the second or third generation after the [[fall of man]] and the other occurring well after the Flood.

==Tides==

The gravitational force of the Moon causes the ocean [[tides]]; these tidal forces have other effects as well. These tidal forces have the effect of creating resistance which slows down the rotation of both objects. In the case of the Earth, the result is that the Earth's rotation slows on the order of one millisecond per century. The Moon's rotation is locked in to its period of revolution, and the same side of the Moon always faces the Earth.

==The "dark" or far side==

The phrase "the ''dark'' side of the Moon" is inaccurate because the Moon does rotate relative to the Sun, with the same period as its period of revolution, once every 29 days. Our view of the Moon from the Earth always shows the same side of the Moon, with the same markings and features. When the Moon is full, the entire side that faces us is experiencing lunar "day" and is lit by the Sun. Two weeks later, when the Moon is new, the side that faces us is experiencing solar "night" and is unlit (and virtually invisible).

The far side of the moon is far more heavily cratered than the near, and the predominant type of cratering is consistent with brecchia-forming meteor impact. This would suggest that the far side suffered its bombardment in the latter of the two catastrophes that Humphreys suggests that the Moon has suffered.

Due to a slight "wobble" in the lunar motion called ''libration,'' we actually see a little bit more than half of the Moon's surface; sometimes it is turned a bit one way and sometimes the other. However, nobody had any idea of what the far side of the Moon looked like until 1959, when a Soviet satellite photographed it and relayed pictures back.
==Earthshine==
[[image:oldmooninnew.jpg|200px|right|thumb|The "old Moon in the new Moon's arms"]]
In the old Scottish ballad ''Sir Patrick Spens'',<ref>Child, Francis James (1860), ''The English and Scottish Popular Ballads,'' [http://www.sacred-texts.com/neu/eng/child/ch058.htm No. 58]; the ballad is thought to refer to an actual event of the year A.D. 1290.</ref> a sailor cautions:

:"I saw the new moon late yestreen
::With the old moon in her arm;
:And if we go to sea, master,
::I fear we'll come to harm."

The effect known as "the old Moon in the new Moon's arms" can often be seen when the Moon is a narrow [[crescent]]. Within the intensely bright crescent, a dim and mysterious view of the entire circular moon is seen. The effect is also known as ''earthshine'' because it is light from the Sun reflected off the Earth to the Moon and back that lights up the darker portion of the Moon. The bright crescent is lit by the Sun and is in full daylight. The rest of the Moon is not lit by the Sun; but an [[astronaut]] standing in this area would see a "full Earth" dominating the nighttime sky, lighting it up by its earthshine. The brightness of Earthshine, and hence the visibility of the old Moon in the new Moon's arms, varies. When the Earth is covered with clouds, or when there is a lot of snow-pack on the side of the Earth facing the Moon, the Earth is a white and bright and the Earthshine is intense. When the Earth looks like a "big, blue marble," it is less intense.

==Lunar calendars==

Throughout history, many calendar systems have been based on the phases of the moon.

The months of the [[Islam|Muslim]] [[calendar]] are determined by observations of the [[hilal]], the moment at which the thin crescent moon first becomes visible. This marks the start of a month. Traditionally, and today in [[Pakistan]] and [[Jordan]], hilal is determined by actual observation and can be affected by weather and other factors. When following the traditional method, it is not actually possible to be certain precisely when future months will begin. In most Muslim countries, actual observation has been replaced by [[astronomy|astronomical]] rules.

== Magnetism Mystery ==

Rocks on the Moon are magnetized, yet there is no magnetic field there today. In one new proposal, researchers at the University of California have suggested that the moon's solid-rock middle layer, called its mantle, stirs up its liquid iron core. The researchers believe this happens because the moon's core and its mantle rotate around slightly different axes, and the boundary between them is not quite spherical.

The strength of this stirring is determined by the angle between the core and the mantle, and the distance between the Earth and the moon, because the tidal forces from the Earth causes the moon's mantle to rotate differently than the core.

This model would explain why the moon no longer has a magnetic field. Since the angle between the mantle and the core has narrowed over time, while the distance between the moon and the Earth has widened, this has caused the tidal forces to steadily decrease. While these forces used to be enough to generate a dynamo inside the moon, they aren't anymore.
<ref>http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2011/1109/Have-scientists-finally-solved-the-mystery-of-the-magnetic-moon</ref>

==The Moon in culture==

"The Old Moon in the New Moon's Arms" is the title of a poem by [[Ella Wheeler Wilcox]], in which she interprets the effect as the New Moon wishing that her lost love, the Old Moon, be in her arms one last time; Venus grants the wish, and:

:Swift thro' the vapors and the golden mist—
::The Full Moon's shadowy shape shone on the night,
:The New Moon reached out clasping arms and kissed
::Her phantom lover in the whole world's sight.

== Other moons ==
[[Image:Many_Moons.jpg|250px|left]]
While the Moon of Earth is the best-known satellite of any [[planet]], other planets in our solar system also have moons. Earth has the least number of moons (one), while [[Jupiter]] has sixty-two. The first extraterrestrial moons to be discovered were the four Galilean moons ([[Io]], [[Europa (moon)|Europa]], [[Ganymede]], and [[Callisto]]). Next to these, Earth's Moon is one of the largest, but Jupiter and [[Saturn]] have moons in orbit about them that might qualify as planets if they orbited the [[Sun]] instead.

=== Sizes of moons ===
Most moons in the solar system are no larger than typical asteroids. They are of irregular shape, have light and variable surface gravities, and are often unstable in their orbits. [[Phobos]] and [[Deimos]], the moons of [[Mars]], fall into this category.

Earth's own moon is an example of a [[dwarf planet]]-sized moon. These moons are so large that their own self-gravity forces them to collapse into spheres or spheroids. Some of them, like [[Ganymede]] and [[Titan (moon)|Titan]], are larger even than the planet [[Mercury]]. Earth's moon was, of course, known to the ancients, but the remaining dwarf-planet-sized moons were generally the first to be discovered in orbit around any given primary. [[Galileo Galilei]] discovered the first four of these in orbit about [[Jupiter]] early in the seventeenth century; [[Christiaan Huygens]] then discovered Titan of [[Saturn]] later in that same century.

== Symbolic importance in Islam ==
The crescent moon is an internationally recognized symbol of [[Islam]]. It appears on the flags of several Islamic nations. It also forms part of the official emblems of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies.<ref>http://islam.about.com/od/history/a/crescent_moon.htm</ref>

== See also ==
*[[Origin of the Moon]]
== External links ==

*[http://www.solarviews.com/eng/terms.htm Glossary]
==Further reading==
* Donna Henes. ''The Moon Watcher's Companion: Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About the Moon, and More'' (2004) [http://www.amazon.com/Moon-Watchers-Companion-Everything-Wanted/dp/1569244669/ref=sr_1_11?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1241592218&sr=1-11 excerpt and text search]
* David Schrunk et al. ''The Moon: Resources, Future Development and Settlement'' (2007) [http://www.amazon.com/Moon-Resources-Development-Settlement-Exploration/dp/0387360557/ref=sr_1_12?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1241592379&sr=1-12 excerpt and text search]
* Seymour Simon, ''The Moon'' (2003) [http://www.amazon.com/Moon-Seymour-Simon/dp/0689835639/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1241592218&sr=1-1 excerpt and text search]

== Notes and References ==
{{reflist|2}}
{{Solarsystem}}
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Moon]]

User talk:ChristopherW

2017-03-22T16:44:56Z

ChristopherW:

{{Welcome}}
If you have any questions, feel free to ask! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 14:53, 21 March 2017 (EDT)
:I have a technical question, I clicked on [[Special:Random]] and came across an "essay" (I forget the title). Isn't [[Special:Random]] only for mainspace articles? Or do "essays" not have their own namespace? (It started with Essay: so it looked like it had its own namespace). [[User:ChristopherW|ChristopherW]] ([[User talk:ChristopherW|talk]]) 15:00, 21 March 2017 (EDT)
:I have the answer to my question, "essays" do not have their own namespace. It seems silly to have asked it when answering the question myself was so easy. [[User:ChristopherW|ChristopherW]] ([[User talk:ChristopherW|talk]]) 15:02, 21 March 2017 (EDT)

::No problem, please do feel free to ask, even if the question does seem "silly"!
As I understand it, articles are created with various namespace titles, but Special:Random picks from any namespace, so there is little effect. However, namespaces are still used in maintenance, statistics, and so on. My bot also uses namespaces so some extent. I don't know if Special:Random was configured intentionally to load pages from any namespace, or if there is a glitch in the system somewhere. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 16:00, 21 March 2017 (EDT)
:<s>Investigation using [[Special:Random]] appears to suggest that no such namespace exists. [[Special:Random/User]] takes you to a random talk page, [[Special:Random/Talk]] to a random talk page but [[Specail:Random/NamespaceThatDoesntExist]] goes to a mainspace article as does [[Special:Random/Essay]] but if you've made a bot that makes use of namespaces (as most bots would probably have to) you probably know more about the subject than me. [[User:ChristopherW|ChristopherW]] ([[User talk:ChristopherW|talk]]) 12:43, 22 March 2017 (EDT)</s>
:My mistake! Essays do appear to have their own namespace but there appears to be a technical problem in that [[Special:Random/Essay]] goes to a random mainspace article not an essay. [[User:ChristopherW|ChristopherW]] ([[User talk:ChristopherW|talk]]) 12:44, 22 March 2017 (EDT)

User talk:ChristopherW

2017-03-22T16:43:13Z

ChristopherW:

{{Welcome}}
If you have any questions, feel free to ask! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 14:53, 21 March 2017 (EDT)
:I have a technical question, I clicked on [[Special:Random]] and came across an "essay" (I forget the title). Isn't [[Special:Random]] only for mainspace articles? Or do "essays" not have their own namespace? (It started with Essay: so it looked like it had its own namespace). [[User:ChristopherW|ChristopherW]] ([[User talk:ChristopherW|talk]]) 15:00, 21 March 2017 (EDT)
:I have the answer to my question, "essays" do not have their own namespace. It seems silly to have asked it when answering the question myself was so easy. [[User:ChristopherW|ChristopherW]] ([[User talk:ChristopherW|talk]]) 15:02, 21 March 2017 (EDT)

::No problem, please do feel free to ask, even if the question does seem "silly"!
As I understand it, articles are created with various namespace titles, but Special:Random picks from any namespace, so there is little effect. However, namespaces are still used in maintenance, statistics, and so on. My bot also uses namespaces so some extent. I don't know if Special:Random was configured intentionally to load pages from any namespace, or if there is a glitch in the system somewhere. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 16:00, 21 March 2017 (EDT)
:Investigation using [[Special:Random]] appears to suggest that no such namespace exists. [[Special:Random/User]] takes you to a random talk page, [[Special:Random/Talk]] to a random talk page but [[Specail:Random/NamespaceThatDoesntExist]] goes to a mainspace article as does [[Special:Random/Essay]] but if you've made a bot that makes use of namespaces (as most bots would probably have to) you probably know more about the subject than me. [[User:ChristopherW|ChristopherW]] ([[User talk:ChristopherW|talk]]) 12:43, 22 March 2017 (EDT)

Muhammad Ali

2017-03-21T19:32:52Z

ChristopherW: Grammar

[[Image:Reagan and Ali photo.jpg|thumb|250px|right|Reagan and Ali]]
'''Muhammad Ali''' was the adopted name of '''Cassius Clay''' (January 17, 1942 – June 3, 2016). He is a retired American boxer and former three-time World Heavyweight Champion; possibly the most famous [[boxing|boxer]] of all time. Through his career Ali had 61 professional fights and went 56-5.

Ali's birth name was Cassius Marcellus Clay, Jr. Clay was born and raised in Louisville, Kentucky, and began training as a boxer when he was 12 years old. Clay won the Light Heavyweight gold medal in the 1960 Summer Olympics in Rome at age 18. He then turned pro and won the heavyweight championship from Sonny Liston. After gaining the title, Clay announced his conversion to Islam and took the name Muhammad Ali. Ali joined the "Black Muslims" (later called the [[Nation of Islam]]) political activist group headed by [[Elijah Muhammad]].

Giving up his heavyweight title when he refused to go to fight in the [[Vietnam War]], Ali lost important years in his prime. Coming back after he was allowed to return to boxing, Ali beat the heavily favored [[George Foreman]] in the famous "Rumble in the Jungle," a bout held in 1974 in Kinshasa. It was Ali's first use of the "Rope-A-Dope" strategy, where he covered up and allowed his opponent to tire himself out with useless punching. Ali's most famous line during his fighting days was, "I'll be floating like a butterfly and stinging like a bee."

Always undersized for a heavyweight, Ali made good use of his speed and technical boxing skills. His skills started to erode quickly once he reached a certain age and he lost his title to a lightly regarded Leon Spinks, who went on to become a footnote in boxing history. Ali took the title back in a lackluster decision, but retired soon thereafter. He tried to make a comeback against then champion Larry Holmes, but out of shape and past his best fighting years, Ali's corner threw in the towel between rounds in the middle of the fight.

After his boxing career, Ali was diagnosed with [[Parkinson's disease]]. Whether this was caused by his boxing is currently a subject of debate.

Ali was not without controversy in his career. In his rematch with Sonny Liston after taking the heavyweight title for the first time, Ali knocked out Liston in the first round with what has come to be called a "phantom punch". In other words, no one is exactly sure what made Liston go down, but it doesn't appear to have been Ali.

On January 8, 2001,President [[Bill Clinton]] presented Muhammad Ali with the [[Presidential Citizens Medal]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://clinton5.nara.gov/WH/new/html/Mon_Jan_8_141714_2001.html|title=President Clinton Awards the Presidential Citizens Medals|date=January 8, 2001|work=Today at The White House|publisher=National Archives and Records Administration|accessdate=June 9, 2016}}</ref> In November 2005, President George W. Bush presented Ali the [[Presidential Medal of Freedom]],<ref>{{cite web| url=http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2005/11/20051103-5.html| archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20080306114811/http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2005/11/20051103-5.html| archivedate=March 6, 2008 | title =Presidential Medal of Freedom Recipients |date=November 3, 2005|publisher=White House Press Secretary| accessdate=May 20, 2008}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/boxing/news/story?id=2219166|title=Bush presents Ali with Presidential Medal of Freedom|date=November 14, 2005|work=ESPN|accessdate=June 9, 2016}}</ref> and Ali also received the [[Otto Hahn Peace Medal|Otto Hahn Peace Medal in Gold]] of the UN Association of Germany (DGVN) in Berlin for his work with the U.S. civil rights movement and the United Nations (December 17, 2005).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/briefs-ali-to-receive-otto-hahn-medal-today-in-berlin/|title=Briefs: Ali to receive Otto Hahn Medal today in Berlin|date=December 17, 2005|work=The Seattle Times|accessdate=June 9, 2016}}</ref>

'''Muhammad Ali''' was also the name of the [[Egyptian]] ruler who, along with his son, Ismail, arranged for the [[French]] to build the [[Suez Canal]].

==See also==
*[[Sport]]
*[[Knockout]]
==References==
<references/>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Ali, Muhammad}}
[[Category:Boxers]]
[[Category:Muslims]]

Russophobia

2017-03-21T19:17:34Z

ChristopherW: /* References */ adding category russia

'''Russophobia''' is an inordinate fear of anything [[Russia]]n, the people, language, or culture. Russophobia has sometimes been used as a scare tactic to achieve [[political]] ends, for example during [[World War II]] in [[Nazi]] [[propaganda]] to support Nazi [[racial]] theories, or by the US [[Democratic party]] and [[Progressive media]] to attack [[Donald Trump]] during the [[2016 Presidential election]] and immediately afterwards in attempts to undermine the [[Trump administration]].

Russophobia should not be confused with the cause of [[Anti-Communist|anti-Communism]], as critics of [[Sen. Joseph McCarthy]] often mistakenly do. The Russian people themselves were the biggest opponents of [[Communism]] beginning from the earliest days after the [[October Revolution]], suffered much, and where denied freedom and the right of [[self-determination]] by the Communists for more than 70 years.

==See also==
*[[Xenophobia]]
*[[Untermensch]]
*[[Islamophobia]]
*[[Homophobia]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Phobias]]
[[Category:Democratic Party]]
[[Category:Russia]]

2016 Presidential election

2017-03-21T19:04:05Z

ChristopherW: Article previously redirected to itself

#REDIRECT [[2016 U.S. presidential election]]

User talk:ChristopherW

2017-03-21T19:02:08Z

ChristopherW: I have the answer to my question.

User talk:ChristopherW

2017-03-21T19:00:20Z

ChristopherW: I do have a question, apologies if you cannot answer it.

Child of God

2017-03-21T18:55:15Z

ChristopherW: Double redirect

#REDIRECT [[Hierarchy]]

Candidates on homosexuality

2017-03-21T18:53:43Z

ChristopherW: Capitalization

#REDIRECT [[2016 presidential candidates on homosexuality]]

Candidates on homosexuality

2017-03-21T18:53:14Z

ChristopherW: Double redirect

#REDIRECT [[2016 Presidential candidates on homosexuality]]

Nehemiah (Biblical book)

2017-03-21T18:52:43Z

ChristopherW: Double redirect

#REDIRECT [[Book of Nehemiah]]

Couperin

2017-03-21T18:52:00Z

ChristopherW: Double redirect

#REDIRECT: [[François Couperin]]

Time Line of the Discovrey of the Structure of DNA

2017-03-21T18:51:22Z

ChristopherW: Double redirect

#REDIRECT [[DNA: Time Line of the Discovery of the Structure]]

DNA: Time Line of the Discoverey of the Structure of DNA

2017-03-21T18:50:18Z

ChristopherW: Spelling, double redirect.

#REDIRECT [[DNA: Time Line of the Discovery of the Structure]]

Benghazi massacre

2017-03-21T18:48:20Z

ChristopherW: Double redirect

#REDIRECT [[Benghazi Attack]]

EarthBound Beginnings

2017-03-21T18:45:45Z

ChristopherW: Removing not needed template (Template:Delete)

'''EarthBound Beginnings''', or ''Mother'', as it’s known in Japan is a role-playing game for the [[Nintendo]] Entertainment System ([[NES]]). Created by copywriter Shigesato Itoi, it is the first entry of the ''Mother'' series, followed by ''[[EarthBound]]'' (''Mother 2'') for the [[Super NES]] and ''Mother 3'' for the Game Boy Advance. ''EarthBound Beginnings'', much like its sequels, is known for deviating from the traditional sword and sorcery motif typical of the role-playing genre, by taking place in a modern American setting.

==Plot Synopsis==
In the early 1900s in Rural America, a man named George and his wife Maria mysteriously vanish, only to have George turn up again a year later. George tells no one where he was or what he was doing during that time and immerses himself in the study of PSI, or psionics. Some 80 years later, George's great-grandson, Ninten, gets caught up in strange happenings, starting with a poltergeist attacking his house. After Ninten stops the attack, he calls his father, who sends Ninten on an adventure to investigate the cause of the strange event.<ref>http://kenisu.webs.com/motherencyclopedia.htm</ref>

With his great-grandfather's diary in hand, Ninten discovers a magical realm called Magicant and is asked by Queen Mary, the ruler of Magicant, to find the eight fragments of her melody so that she can sing it again. Along the journey, Ninten travels back and forth from Rural America and Magicant, battling zombies, aliens, and other unusual foes including hippies and floating eyeballs. In his search for the eight melodies, Ninten is joined by Ana, a psychic girl, Lloyd, a boy genius, and Teddy, a gang leader with a heart of gold.

==Gameplay==
''EarthBound Beginnings'' much like most role-playing games (RPGs), has the player control the characters in an overworld where one can walk, run, check objects, talk to non-player characters and so on. In certain areas of the overworld, the player can get drawn into battles at random.

During battles, The enemy character(s) appear on screen and the player is given a menu of different commands. These commands include Fight, which deals damage to a foe of the player's choosing ND PSI, which allows the player to pick a psychic ability to use. PSI powers include PK Beam, a damge dealing move, 4th-D Slip, which guarantees the player a 100% chance to successfully run away from battle, and LifeUp, which recovers HP.

HP stands for Hit Points and determines the characters' health. If the HP counter reaches zero, the character in question falls unconscious and cannot take any action until he or she is revived, either at a hospital or by means of PSI. Using PSI consumes Psychic Points, or PP. Once the PP counter reaches zero, no PSI can be used until PP is recovered by staying at a hotel or by other means.

For winning battles, the player is awarded Experience Points (EXP) and a varying amount of money, which must be withdrawn from an ATM before it can be spent. When a character gains enough EXP, he or she will level-up, which means stats will increase. Such stats include Fight, which determines attack power, Defense, which determines how much damage enemies can deal to the character, and maximum HP and PP, which increase by varying amounts per level-up.

Player characters can also equip certain items to boost their stats such as boomerangs, ray guns, and baseball bats to increase Fight and coins and pendants to increase Defense.

==Characters==

'''Ninten''' - A twelve-year-old boy living in Podunk with his mother and two younger sisters. Ninten is a strong attacker and in the course of the game, learns a variety of PSI powers for defense and healing. His favorite food is prime rib and he also likes to play baseball.<ref name=MyFirstRef>http://kenisu.webs.com/motherencyclopedia.htm</ref>

'''Ana''' - A girl who lives in the wintery town of Snowman with psychic powers. Unlike Ninten, she can learn offensive PSI powers such as PK Fire and PK Beam. She joins Ninten on his quest in search of her mother, who mysteriously vanished.

'''Lloyd''' - A timid boy with a genius IQ who get picked on in school. Lloyd joins Ninten to see Duncan's factory, which is constructing a large rocket. While Lloyd cannot use PSI, he makes up for it by being the only character who can use certain tools in battle, like bottle rockets and even a flamethrower. He is also good with machines.

'''Teddy''' - The leader of the Bla-Bla Gang (Black Blood in the original Japanese). Despite his appearance, Teddy is not as bad as he seems and joins Ninten to avenge his parents, who were killed by "mountain creatures." Teddy also possesses no PSI, but he's very strong and is the only character who can equip swords.

'''Ninten's father''' - Though he is always away from home, Ninten's father is always a phone call away. He deposits money into Ninten's bank account and can also save your progress.

'''Pippi''' - A little girl who gets captured by Zombies. Ninten rescues her early in the game and she temporarily joins him. Pippi can help fight in battle and can even level up. In addition, she gives Ninten the Franklin Badge, an important item required to progress through the game.

'''Queen Mary''' - The beloved ruler of Magicant, Queen Mary is known by her subjects for her beautiful singing. However, she forgot how her song goes, but knows that it was divided into eight parts and is scattered in various locations for Ninten to find.

'''Flying Men''' - Five brothers who resemble birds and can aid Ninten in battles in Magicant. They represent Ninten's courage.

==Release==
''Mother'' was released for the Nintendo Famicom in 1989. It was slated for a release in North America under the title ''Earth Bound'' (note the space) in 1991<ref>http://starmen.net/mother1/</ref>, but despite being fully translated into English, the release was cancelled. ''Mother'' was re-released in 2003 for the Game Boy Advance as part of the compilation game, ''Mother 1+2''. On June 14, 2015, ''Mother'' was finally relaeased in North America and Europe for the Wii U Virtual Console under the title ''EarthBound Beginnings''.<ref>https://www.nintendo.com/games/detail/PtRic7KxqW4Ah-HjYRLSR0GbQyzAKYJZ</ref>

==References==
{{reflist}}

Water Payton

2017-03-21T18:44:24Z

ChristopherW: Removing AfD

'''Walter Jerry Payton''' (July 25, 1954 – November 1, 1999) was an American Football player for the [[Chicago Bears]]. He played all thirteen years of his career with the Bears and is considered by many to be the best [[running back]] of all time.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Payton, Walter}}

[[Category:Sportspeople]]

Tigris and Euphrates

2017-03-21T18:43:39Z

ChristopherW: Apparently Conservapedia doesn't have an AfD process? This shouldn't be here then.

The '''[[Tigris]] and [[Euphrates]]''' are two rivers where civilization began in [[Mesopotamia]] before 3500 B.C., as described in the Book of [[Genesis]] and also confirmed by non-biblical sources.

[[Category:Asian Rivers]]

Mark Zuckerberg

2017-03-21T18:30:01Z

ChristopherW: Removed category atheists. He recently said he was no longer an atheist (he didn't specify if he converted to Christianity or simply changed to a different perversion though)

'''Mark Zuckerberg''' (1984) is an American [[computer]] scientist, creator of the social networking site [[Facebook]]. He studied at [[Harvard University]], and is also an important philanthropist. He was named Time Magazine's Person of the Year in 2010:

<blockquote>
Person of the Year 2010: Mark Zuckerberg. For connecting more than half a billion people and mapping the social relations among them; for creating a new system of exchanging information; and for changing how we all live our lives, Mark Elliot Zuckerberg is TIME's 2010 Person of the Year. <ref>http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/0,28757,2036683,00.html</ref>
</blockquote>

''Facebook is based in Palo Alto, [[California]]. The name of the site is based on the paper facebooks that many colleges give to incoming students, faculty, and staff depicting members of the campus community.'' [http://www.associatepublisher.com/e/f/fa/facebook.htm]

According to [[Forbes]] Zuckerberg is the sixth richest person in the world.<ref>[http://www.forbes.com/billionaires/list/ forbes.com]</ref>

Zuckerberg has announced he plans to leave Facebook in 2017, largely because he became disgusted with how social media has been used by people to attack each other.<ref>https://www.getinknews.co/headlines/coal/rfi/mark-zuckerberg-set-to-leave-facebook-later-this-year/?s2=6009-MZ-DED-TXT</ref>

Zuckerberg is an [[Atheism|Atheist]].<ref>[http://www.beliefnet.com/Celebrity-Faith-Database/Z/Mark-Zuckerberg.aspx# beliefnet.com]</ref>

<center>
[[File:Mark s Visit to Newark, NJ.jpg]]

Mark's Visit to Newark, NJ.
</center>
== References ==
<references/>

== See also ==
* [[MySpace]]
* [[Bill Gates]]
* [[Great Achievements by Teenagers]]

== External links ==

*[http://www.facebook.com/markzuckerberg?v=wall Mark Zuckerberg] At Facebook.
*[http://www.associatepublisher.com/e/f/fa/facebook.htm Facebook AllExperts Encyclopedia]
*[http://www.pointsincase.com/columns/justin/3-27-05.htm Face to Facebook (Guide to Facebook.com).]
*[http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,2037027,00.html Photos: A Zuckerberg Family Album.]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Zuckerberg, Mark}}
[[Category:Computer Science]]
[[Category:Billionaires]]
[[Category:Liberals]]

Paul Dirac

2017-03-21T16:14:34Z

ChristopherW: He is disappointingly an atheist

[[Image:Dirac.gif|right|thumb|Paul Dirac]]
'''Paul Adrien Maurice Dirac''' (1902-1984) was a [[United Kingdom|British]] theoretical [[physicist]] who helped develop mathematical expressions of relativistic [[quantum mechanics]]. His [[science|scientific]] [[philosophy]] was this: "Physical laws should have mathematical beauty and simplicity."

Dirac developed an equation of motion for the wavefunction of the [[electron]] based on [[Theory of relativity|relativity]] (''"The importance of Dirac's work lies essentially in his famous wave equation, which introduced special relativity into Schrödinger's equation."''.<ref>[http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1933/dirac.html The Official Web Site of the Nobel Prize:] Biography of Paul Dirac</ref>) Dirac predicted the existence of the [[positron]], the electron's [[antiparticle]], which was subsequently discovered by [[Carl Anderson]] in 1932. Dirac shared the Nobel Prize in 1933 with [[Schrödinger|Erwin Schrödinger]].<ref>[http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1933/ The Official Web Site of the Nobel Prize:] The Nobel Prize in Physics 1933
Erwin Schrödinger, Paul A.M. Dirac</ref> Dirac was the founder of [[quantum electrodynamics]].

Dirac published the "[[Principles of Quantum Mechanics]]" in 1930, which introduced the widely used [[Dirac delta]] [[function]] and [[bra-ket notation]]. Inspired in part by this book, the physicist [[Richard Feynman]] later proposed a path integral formulation of quantum mechanics in 1948.

Dirac spent most of his career at Cambridge University; he later taught at Florida State University.

Dirac was such an outspoken atheist that fellow physicist Wolfgang Pauli is said to had quipped: "Our friend Dirac also has a religion! The central tenet of his religion is: 'There is no God, and Dirac is His prophet.' "

==References==
<references />
==Further reading==
* Farmelo, Graham. '' The Strangest Man: The Hidden Life of Paul Dirac, Mystic of the Atom'' (2009)

{{DEFAULTSORT:Dirac, Paul}}
[[Category:Physicists]]
[[Category:Nobel laureates in Physics]]
[[Category:Atheists]]