Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
292,405
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 521:
Line 521: + + + + + + + + +
Talk:Examples of Bias in Wikipedia (view source)
Revision as of 04:25, July 26, 2007
, 04:25, July 26, 2007→What if Wikipedia editors were to remove some instances of bias?: response
::So, beware if you dare fix that link, you will be a marked user, stalked and harassed, if your contributions do not tow the party line. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 23:16, 25 July 2007 (EDT)
::So, beware if you dare fix that link, you will be a marked user, stalked and harassed, if your contributions do not tow the party line. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 23:16, 25 July 2007 (EDT)
:::So, um, what's the problem and why? [[User:AManInBlack|AManInBlack]] 23:46, 25 July 2007 (EDT)
:::So, um, what's the problem and why? [[User:AManInBlack|AManInBlack]] 23:46, 25 July 2007 (EDT)
::::The text of the Berlet entry uses the John Birch Society's ''New American'' allegedly to give balance & criticism. The quoted text even puts Berlet at odds with the Anti-Defamation League. But when you click on the link to read the souorce document, the link is broken. The source document, ''Propagandizing the Police'', cites Berlet as having written for extremist publications. I was banned likewise for using a different source that cited Berltt writting for another extremist publication (See [[Guardian]], here in CP). If Berlet writes for extremist publications, he cannot be used as a source for anything other than his own organization, Politcal Research Associates. Yet Berlet literally authored the etnire Dominionism series (loo at the Template under "critics" [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Dominionism] or you can check the contribs any page in the series).
IOW, Berlet cannot be cited for anything in Wikipedia, as per Wikipedia's attribution policies, written by SlimVirgin, which state, "An extreme political website should never be used as a source for Wikipedia except in articles discussing the opinions of that organization or the opinions of a larger like-minded group," '''a passage I was the author of'''. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AReliable_sources&diff=11048345&oldid=11048287 466]
Oddly, SlimVirgin is Berlet's staunchest defender.
Oh, as to the smear in the Brandt entry, the neologism "conspiracist" has been documented to be Berlet's own invention. Berlet create Wikipedia's Conspiricist entry, and cited himself. Berlet called Brandt a conspiracist, so using his own neologism is another policy violation in the Brandt case (all this I called attention to ArbCom, Jimbo, and Foundation two years ago). The John Birch Society in WP is slander with Berlet's neologism as "conspiracist." [[User:RobS|RobS]] 00:25, 26 July 2007 (EDT)
broken link
== Number 1 ==
== Number 1 ==