Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
_ News Worth Discussing _ Cuba entry in Wikipedia stirs controversy
Posted by: Google News
| http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=T&ct=us/0-0&fd=R&url=http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/14481721.htm&cid=0&ei=e4tXROONLqTepgLo58m9BQ Miami Herald, FL - ... The fuss is over the Cuba entry in Wikipedia, the free online encyyclopedia created, edited and administered entirely by volunteers with the altruistic purpose ... |
Posted by: Google News
| http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=T&ct=us/2-0&fd=R&url=http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/news/nation/14481721.htm&cid=0&ei=RJpXRNncEZSgogKNmuH8BA Centre Daily Times, PA - ... The fuss is over the Cuba entry in Wikipedia, the free online encyyclopedia created, edited and administered entirely by volunteers with the altruistic purpose ... |
Posted by: Google News
| http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=T&ct=us/1-0&fd=R&url=http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/nation/14481721.htm&cid=0&ei=dqFXRPyEEoKuoQLo0oz8BA Bradenton Herald, United States - ... The fuss is over the Cuba entry in Wikipedia, the free online encyyclopedia created, edited and administered entirely by volunteers with the altruistic purpose ... |
Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky
The edit war over the article on Cuba seems to have triggered the RfC against Adam Carr, which I reported in http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=1022&hl= Adam Carr and 172, two of the most abusive and petulant editors I have ever encountered at Wikipedia, figure prominently all around. Does anyone know who the admin was who perma-banned Scott Grayban?
Posted by: kotepho
Jdforrester/James F. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User:Sgrayban. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jdforrester has some discussion of it and I think it was discussed on an/i too, but it is a pain in the ass to find old threads there so I'm not going to bother. It might have just been discussion of trying to get the RFC deleted though.
Posted by: Google News
| http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=T&ct=us/0-0&fd=R&url=http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/newssentinel/news/editorial/14498364.htm&cid=0&ei=XNRZRMizK4fMpwLNjd2xAQ Fort Wayne News Sentinel, IN - ... The fuss is over the Cuba entry in Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia created, edited and administered entirely by volunteers with the aim of becoming a ... |
Posted by: Google News
| http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=T&ct=us/9-0&fd=R&url=http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/14498364.htm&cid=0&ei=bdtZRNKFO4fMpwLNjd2xAQ San Jose Mercury News, USA - ... The fuss is over the Cuba entry in Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia created, edited and administered entirely by volunteers with the aim of becoming a ... |
Posted by: Google News
| http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=T&ct=us/9-0&fd=R&url=http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/news/politics/14498364.htm&cid=0&ei=a-NZROzSJIfyoQKQk_G7CQ Pioneer Press, MN - ... The fuss is over the Cuba entry in Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia created, edited and administered entirely by volunteers with the aim of becoming a ... |
Posted by: Google News
| http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=T&ct=us/9-0&fd=R&url=http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/politics/14498364.htm&cid=0&ei=H-1ZRKLqDoz8oQK37MH8BA Kansas City Star, MO - ... The fuss is over the Cuba entry in Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia created, edited and administered entirely by volunteers with the aim of becoming a ... |
Posted by: Google News
| http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=T&ct=us/9-0&fd=R&url=http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/news/politics/14498364.htm&cid=0&ei=O_tZRIr8CYe6pwLjqcD-BA Centre Daily Times, PA - ... The fuss is over the Cuba entry in Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia created, edited and administered entirely by volunteers with the aim of becoming a ... |
Posted by: Google News
| http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=T&ct=us/2-0&fd=R&url=http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/politics/14498364.htm&cid=0&ei=dBBaRO-UIIWKpAKqq-zgBw Bradenton Herald, United States - ... The fuss is over the Cuba entry in Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia created, edited and administered entirely by volunteers with the aim of becoming a ... |
Posted by: Google News
| http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=T&ct=us/1-0&fd=R&url=http://www.sanluisobispo.com/mld/sanluisobispo/news/politics/14498364.htm&cid=0&ei=1hdaRJq0JYz8oQK37MH8BA San Luis Obispo Tribune, CA - ... The fuss is over the Cuba entry in Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia created, edited and administered entirely by volunteers with the aim of becoming a ... |
Posted by: Google News
| http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=T&ct=us/4-0&fd=R&url=http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/news/politics/14498364.htm&cid=0&ei=TCdaRNfCCobOpwKsjKT_BA Columbus Ledger-Enquirer, GA - ... The fuss is over the Cuba entry in Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia created, edited and administered entirely by volunteers with the aim of becoming a ... |
Posted by: Google News
| http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=T&ct=us/5-0&fd=R&url=http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/news/politics/14498364.htm&cid=0&ei=sDZaRIO5MofOpwKDrJn_BA Monterey County Herald, CA - ... The fuss is over the Cuba entry in Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia created, edited and administered entirely by volunteers with the aim of becoming a ... |
Posted by: Google News
| http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=T&ct=us/6-0&fd=R&url=http://www.duluthsuperior.com/mld/duluthsuperior/news/politics/14498364.htm&cid=0&ei=CD5aRNPWCZigogL2tNz8BA Duluth News Tribune, MN - ... The fuss is over the Cuba entry in Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia created, edited and administered entirely by volunteers with the aim of becoming a ... |
Posted by: Google News
| http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=T&ct=us/8-0&fd=R&url=http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/politics/14498364.htm&cid=0&ei=Z0VaRPv8GI3MpwLE75hg Kentucky.com, KY - ... The fuss is over the Cuba entry in Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia created, edited and administered entirely by volunteers with the aim of becoming a ... |
Posted by: Google News
| http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=T&ct=us/7-0&fd=R&url=http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/mld/myrtlebeachonline/news/politics/14498364.htm&cid=0&ei=cVNaRLrBOYfyoQKQk_G7CQ Myrtle Beach Sun News, SC - ... The fuss is over the Cuba entry in Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia created, edited and administered entirely by volunteers with the aim of becoming a ... |
Posted by: Google News
| http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=T&ct=us/0-0&fd=R&url=http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002973183_wiki05.html&cid=0&ei=XwFbRNr-CIW6pwLks63-BA Seattle Times, United States - ... The fuss is over the Cuba entry in Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia created, edited and administered by volunteers with the aim of becoming a Web-based ... |
Posted by: Donny
This is an interesting article about the "Cuba" edit war. It's interesting that the "Cuba" edit war, of all the thousands and thousands of edit wars ongoing in Wikipedia, has attracted so much press attention.
Posted by: guy
QUOTE(Donny @ Fri 5th May 2006, 12:55pm) 
It's interesting that the "Cuba" edit war, of all the thousands and thousands of edit wars ongoing in Wikipedia, has attracted so much press attention.
Many edit wars are so stupid and laughable that newspapers would only quote them if they wanted to pour scorn on Wikipedia.
Posted by: Donny
QUOTE(Hushthis @ Sat 6th May 2006, 1:12am)
Paranoia, delusions of grandeur, anti-social assumptions ... the arguments we read in defense of Wikipedia are prima facia evidence of a pathological group process.
Maybe you could write a book about Wikipedia. A good starting point might be your posts here on this forum.
Posted by: blissyu2
I think its about time that major media focussed on this kind of nonsense. It is a major criticism of Wikipedia that members of the general public can see the talk pages, which expose just how stupid the community element is. I think that Wikipedia would be infinitely better served if they reserved viewing the talk pages to people with registered accounts, and forbid them from scraping too. Cuba is a good example because the controversy surrounding it is so well known.
Posted by: guy
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Sat 6th May 2006, 8:03am)
I think that Wikipedia would be infinitely better served if they reserved viewing the talk pages to people with registered accounts
But would innocent members of the public using Wikipedia as a reference source be better served?
Posted by: Lir
QUOTE(Donny @ Fri 5th May 2006, 6:59pm)
Maybe you could write a book about Wikipedia. A good starting point might be your posts here on this forum.
You really should, there is a market.
Posted by: sgrayban
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Sat 6th May 2006, 12:03am)
I think that Wikipedia would be infinitely better served if they reserved viewing the talk pages to people with registered accounts, and forbid them from scraping too. Cuba is a good example because the controversy surrounding it is so well known.
Then wikipedia would really be under media fire for banning un-registered users from talk pages. Especially when it comes to hate comments that Adam Carr loves to toss around like its a game. Some where Wikipedia has to take full responsibility for the actions of there abusive users like him and the Admin that allow it to keep going. Ass kissing just isn't going to work forever for Adam Carr.
Posted by: sgrayban
QUOTE(Hush_This @ Sun 7th May 2006, 1:04pm)
A person can register a user name and make it their sole purpose to systematically remove personal attacks from talk pages. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Refactoring and would go a long way toward making talk pages productive. I would start by deleting any sentence that contains the word troll. Instead, Wikipedia has made it a mission to cement this slanderous term into popular lexicons.
I did that twice and both times I was warned by some admin that I am not allowed to remove anything on the talk pages and that Adam's comment's are within his rights to make.
QUOTE(Hush_This @ Sun 7th May 2006, 1:04pm)
Carr should read up on the single party democracy the United States established in Japan after it nuked them twice, or the single-party constitutional democracy in Ivory Coast, before http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cuba&diff=51632464&oldid=51613130
QUOTE
http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/view/2898/1/152: “sometimes politicians and intellectuals —due to a lack of knowledge or ill will— slander our political system and try to deny our democracy, the legitimacy of our electoral system, the characteristics of our state, the existence of human rights and even the existence of our Rule of Law. Cuba’s Rule of Law is a political system and a form of democracy different from other countries because it is planned for a different situation and different purposes.â€
Oh that would certainly open a slew of hate comment's with Adam.
Posted by: Donny
QUOTE(sgrayban @ Mon 8th May 2006, 6:17am)
I did that twice and both times I was warned by some admin that I am not allowed to remove anything on the talk pages and that Adam's comment's are within his rights to make.
I think most of the posters here know this game; the game is called "applying the rules to suit yourself". George Orwell called it "doublethink". I'm not sure what Wikipedia admins call it, but they all do it. You might be interested in reading the "wiki-fiddler" article I posted in the "Websites critical of Wikipedia" thread in the general discussions forum.
We've even had one admin admitting on this forum that he applied the rules selectively. On the other hand, though, many of the Wikipedia "alphabet soup" rules, like "assume good faith" and "no personal attacks", are self-contradictory, so it's basically impossible for anyone to apply them in any sane way anyway.
Posted by: sgrayban
QUOTE(Donny @ Sun 7th May 2006, 8:31pm)
I think most of the posters here know this game; the game is called "applying the rules to suit yourself". George Orwell called it "doublethink". I'm not sure what Wikipedia admins call it, but they all do it. You might be interested in reading the "wiki-fiddler" article I posted in the "Websites critical of Wikipedia" thread in the general discussions forum.
We've even had one admin admitting on this forum that he applied the rules selectively. On the other hand, though, many of the Wikipedia "alphabet soup" rules, like "assume good faith" and "no personal attacks", are self-contradictory, so it's basically impossible for anyone to apply them in any sane way anyway.
This is exactly why Wikipedia is unreliable as a source for anything. If the policies contradict themselves then there is no way to produce accurate articles. It's just a collection of 1 person's Pee-ohh-vee that is reverted by the next Pee-ohh-vee.
Posted by: Lir
Doesn't the United States have a single party system? I mean, the Democratic and Republican Parties both come from the Democratic-Republican Party, so it seems an awful lot like a single-party system to me; maybe its a half-party system, since the Republicans control the Congress, Presidency, and the Judicial Branches. Even if the US is a two-party system, thats not much better than a single-party system; I know, 'officially' the US has lots of parties, but its absurd to suggest those parties are given any effective power -- the most popular of them, the Green Party, doesn't even get admitted to the presidential debates.
Posted by: sgrayban
QUOTE(Lir @ Sun 7th May 2006, 9:26pm)
Doesn't the United States have a single party system? I mean, the Democratic and Republican Parties both come from the Democratic-Republican Party, so it seems an awful lot like a single-party system to me; maybe its a half-party system, since the Republicans control the Congress, Presidency, and the Judicial Branches. Even if the US is a two-party system, thats not much better than a single-party system; I know, 'officially' the US has lots of parties, but its absurd to suggest those parties are given any effective power -- the most popular of them, the Green Party, doesn't even get admitted to the presidential debates.
Well it depends on how you look at it. If the President is Republican usually the Demo's have control over Congress. So that technically makes it a 2 party system depending on what political scientist you talk to.
Posted by: Lir
QUOTE(sgrayban @ Sun 7th May 2006, 11:37pm)
So that technically makes it a 2 party system depending on what political scientist you talk to.
Right, Im just pointing out that the Republicans and Democrats are really just two branches of the same party -- so its more a one-party system, than anything else. Its like, um, hardline Stalinist Soviets, and more liberal Khruschivite Soviets.
Posted by: sgrayban
QUOTE(Lir @ Sun 7th May 2006, 11:09pm)
QUOTE(sgrayban @ Sun 7th May 2006, 11:37pm)
So that technically makes it a 2 party system depending on what political scientist you talk to.
Right, Im just pointing out that the Republicans and Democrats are really just two branches of the same party -- so its more a one-party system, than anything else. Its like, um, hardline Stalinist Soviets, and more liberal Khruschivite Soviets.
okie dokie