Editing Wikipedia (neutral)
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
== management == | == management == | ||
"Free" from the [[Wikimedia point of view]] means both free to use and free to edit, except for [[trolls]] and others excluded for | "Free" from the [[Wikimedia point of view]] means both free to use and free to edit, except for [[trolls]] and others excluded for political reasons, of which there are many. ''Contact the [[GodKing]] for advice on these criteria. Many [[wiki management]] [[Wikipedia as a bad example|bad examples are drawn from Wikipedia]].'' Some of these problems hamper the corpus itself: | ||
Wikipedia's [[server log]]s are not available to compile important information regarding [[link]] transit, which articles are most often reached from most others, which would much aid the editing effort. This information | Wikipedia's [[server log]]s are not available to compile important information regarding [[link]] transit, which articles are most often reached from most others, which would much aid the editing effort. This information is probably withheld because it is useful to [[Bomis.com]] - ''see [[Wikimedia corruption]]'' - and would be useful to other [[search engine]]s. | ||
[[Wikipedia factions]] constantly compete the control the presentation of certain topics. Although Wikipedia's [[arbitration]] has dealt remarkably well with subjects like [[abortion]] or [[capitalism]], they deal very poorly with [[Zionism]] or any subject where a [[mechanistic paradigm]] is challenged, e.g. [[immunology]], [[philosophy of mathematics]], [[talent]], [[creativity]], etc. Their [[neutral point of view]] ideology seems to lead strictly to mediocrity on such subjects that rely more on cognitive or spiritual assumptions about the [[human body]], [[human death]], [[killing]], and the dangers of [[Platonist]] views, [[scientism]], and [[technological escalation]]. Almost by definition, "Wikipedians" seem to favour such views. | [[Wikipedia factions]] constantly compete the control the presentation of certain topics. Although Wikipedia's [[arbitration]] has dealt remarkably well with subjects like [[abortion]] or [[capitalism]], they deal very poorly with [[Zionism]] or any subject where a [[mechanistic paradigm]] is challenged, e.g. [[immunology]], [[philosophy of mathematics]], [[talent]], [[creativity]], etc. Their [[neutral point of view]] ideology seems to lead strictly to mediocrity on such subjects that rely more on cognitive or spiritual assumptions about the [[human body]], [[human death]], [[killing]], and the dangers of [[Platonist]] views, [[scientism]], and [[technological escalation]]. Almost by definition, "Wikipedians" seem to favour such views. | ||
As evidence | As evidence, many of their [[software developer]]s abuse their power: "By wrapping up their ability to contribute with their ability to rule, they are made effectively unaccountable." [http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developer_access]. [[Sysop vigilantiism]] is a related problem. To be fair, some of these issues arise strictly from the project's complexity: | ||
Wikipedia is multilingual, and an [[open content|open-content]], collaboratively developed creation, managed and operated by the heavily conflicted [[Wikimedia|Wikimedia Foundation]]. As of [[February]] [[2004]], it contains over 210,000 articles in [[English language|English]], and over 280,000 articles in other languages. | Wikipedia is multilingual, and an [[open content|open-content]], collaboratively developed creation, managed and operated by the [[Wikimedia corruption|heavily conflicted]] [[Wikimedia|Wikimedia Foundation]]. As of [[February]] [[2004]], it contains over 210,000 articles in [[English language|English]], and over 280,000 articles in other languages. | ||
== in violation of GFDL == | == in violation of GFDL == |