[Plantagenet]

If the US backs the uprising and wants Mubarek to step down, then why is Joe Biden saying that Mubarek isn't a dictator and shouldn't step down?

[vision-master]

Linky?

[gollum]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'I')f the US backs the uprising and wants Mubarek to step down, then why is Joe Biden saying that Mubarek isn't a dictator and shouldn't step down?

[pup55]

Several questions:

a. Is the wikileak information correct, or is it "disinformation" deliberately launched for some reason...

b. If the US is seen as backing one side or the other is it necessarily a good thing for that side? The argument can be made that being seen as supported by the US actually is a net negative for the opposition, since a lot of their followers are radicalized and still hate us.

c. Anytime the US screws around in some little nation's internal politics there is an excellent chance that the whole thing will blow up in their face a few years down the line.

[Keith_McClary]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pup55', 'T')he argument can be made that being seen as supported by the US actually is a net negative for the opposition, since a lot of their followers are radicalized and still hate us.

[Sixstrings]

It appears the regime change support was a Bush program:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')b]Obama Cut Funding To Promote Democracy In Egypt, Disappointing Human Rights Activists
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/28/obama-cut-egypt-funding_n_815731.html

[Rod_Cloutier]

This weekend as a pet peeve, I tried (In vain) to edit and contribute material to wikipedia. Both articles I tried to submit were deleted in a matter of seconds. The first on a proported 'Non-neutrality' by an editor that went by the obviously biased avatar 'Republican-Jacobite', the second as instant deletion due to proported 'advertising', on an article I wrote about Autism awareness, (advertising is a claim I would dispute to my dying breath).

Given the almost daily usage of the wikipedia website, it did not occur to me how heavily censored it is to content, until I tried posting some. I've since been researching others who are angry about this site, (Its impossible to complain to the anomomous editors of wikipedia itself).

I hit on this webpage: http://knol.google.com/k/carl-hewitt/co ... 4rx7g1t/5# which had me even more infuriated that such a corrupt, and biased organization can present content on the web with the pretense to be an authority on anything!

Wow, am I ever mad at how I've been taken all this time.

[Bruce_S]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Repent', '
')I hit on this webpage: http://knol.google.com/k/carl-hewitt/co ... 4rx7g1t/5# which had me even more infuriated that such a corrupt, and biased organization can present content on the web with the pretense to be an authority on anything!

Wow, am I ever mad at how I've been taken all this time.

[eastbay]

I had a similar experience. A friend added my peak oil novel, Shut Down, to the very short list of peak oil-related works of fiction. It was deleted. I suspect much of the editing is based of whim, politics, personal beliefs, etc.

[Keith_McClary]

What bugs me is they claim to prefer quality sources like peer reviewed journals or graduate level textbooks. However, if there are none, they default to "usually reliable sources", which includes the MSM. So if GWB said something it would not be a source, but if an anonymous GWB flunky "leaks" the same lie to an embedded WaPo hack, it becomes a statement of fact in Wackypedia.

If they can't find an actual news story, they can use a speculative opinion piece in a newspaper Sunday supplement written by an obscure freelancer.

Last I bothered to look, the History of Israel article was sourced to the Bible.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Repent', 'I') hit on this webpage: http://knol.google.com/k/carl-hewitt/co ... 4rx7g1t/5# which had me even more infuriated that such a corrupt, and biased organization can present content on the web with the pretense to be an authority on anything!

[EnergyUnlimited]

Perhaps much of this censoring is used to prevent littering and vandalism.

[Bruce_S]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergyUnlimited', 'P')erhaps much of this censoring is used to prevent littering and vandalism.

[EnergyUnlimited]

I do not use Wiki much, but yes, if I do use it, it is usually about some scientific subject and mainly as a source of further references to original work in question.

[PrestonSturges]

A lot of wingnut mouth breathers hate wikipedia because it pretty much dismisses every aspect of their made up history. Jesus wasn't really the first president of the United States, blacks really didn't enlist in the Confederate army, Hitler really wasn't really a Marxist, FDR didn't cause the Depression. Without aggressive editing, Wikipedia would be nothing but pat of the larger hoax/urban legend/propaganda wingnut multiverse.

[AgentR11]

The Wikipedia concept and controversial or adversarial content do not play well together. It is guaranteed that the most motivated on the topic will, in the end, win the day. As this is the expected and understood outcome, the right way to use wikipedia for such topics is to go straight to the changes/edits history; which do preserve, last I checked, the information that might have been removed from the article.

There is also inherent editorial bias in any work that touches on current issues; as much as some might wish to deny it. This causes something that might look truthful or constructive to one person, to appear to be persistent vandalism with malicious intent to another. This is just the way humans are, no sense getting bent out of shape over it.

[vision-master]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Keith_McClary', 'W')hat bugs me is they claim to prefer quality sources like peer reviewed journals or graduate level textbooks. However, if there are none, they default to "usually reliable sources", which includes the MSM. So if GWB said something it would not be a source, but if an anonymous GWB flunky "leaks" the same lie to an embedded WaPo hack, it becomes a statement of fact in Wackypedia.

If they can't find an actual news story, they can use a speculative opinion piece in a newspaper Sunday supplement written by an obscure freelancer.

Last I bothered to look, the History of Israel article was sourced to the Bible.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Repent', 'I') hit on this webpage: http://knol.google.com/k/carl-hewitt/co ... 4rx7g1t/5# which had me even more infuriated that such a corrupt, and biased organization can present content on the web with the pretense to be an authority on anything!

[Pretorian]

I edited one religious article on wiki (added an external link to a skeptical website). Link was removed within 5 minutes. Then I asked the editor ( a distinguished wikipediest, no less) what is wrong with the link and unedited his edit. Since he couldn't answer ( the link is #3 on google search for the name of the article) he left it be. For now anyway. And that editor is a member of the sect the article is about

[babystrangeloop]

Ad hom deleted.

[Keith_McClary]

From xkcd.org :


Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

[Outcast_Searcher]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergyUnlimited', 'P')erhaps much of this censoring is used to prevent littering and vandalism.