The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Disputes Over Content of Wikipedia Articles Reflect a Country's Geopolitical ... ...
Newsfeed
post Thu 21st July 2011, 4:22am
Post #1


Postmaster General
********

Group: Bots
Posts: 3,272
Joined: Mon 3rd Sep 2007, 9:29pm
Member No.: 2,885



Disputes Over Content of Wikipedia Articles Reflect a Country's Geopolitical...

Science Daily (press release)

ScienceDaily (July 20, 2011) — Disputes over the content of articles in the internet encyclopaedia Wikipedia can serve as an indicator for the political stability of a country. This was proposed based on a "Wikipedia Dispute Index" developed by...

View the article
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Thu 21st July 2011, 3:07pm
Post #2


Member
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911



What a poorly designed interface. Seems like a useless tool.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lilburne
post Thu 21st July 2011, 6:07pm
Post #3


Chameleon
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 890
Joined: Thu 17th Jun 2010, 11:42am
Member No.: 21,803

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 21st July 2011, 4:07pm) *

What a poorly designed interface. Seems like a useless tool.


Does it also follow that the more disputed pages link to a science article the less stable the science theory is?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gary_Niger
post Tue 2nd August 2011, 1:41am
Post #4


New Member
*

Group: Contributors
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri 29th Jul 2011, 2:07am
From: Tarzana, California
Member No.: 60,914



QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 21st July 2011, 11:07am) *

What a poorly designed interface. Seems like a useless tool.

No matter what country I hover over, it still says "Canada."
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricBarbour
post Tue 2nd August 2011, 3:35am
Post #5


blah
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am
Member No.: 5,066

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Svalbard is colored black, which I presume means its article is a battleground.
It doesn't look like a battleground to me.....neither do the articles in the category.
Ditto for North Korea.

Typical ScienceDaily story--sloppy.

This post has been edited by EricBarbour: Tue 2nd August 2011, 3:40am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
communicat
post Tue 2nd August 2011, 1:08pm
Post #6


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 270
Joined: Sun 31st Jul 2011, 11:31am
From: Southern Africa
Member No.: 61,155

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Newsfeed @ Thu 21st July 2011, 6:22am) *

Disputes Over Content of Wikipedia Articles Reflect a Country's Geopolitical...

Science Daily (press release)

ScienceDaily (July 20, 2011) — Disputes over the content of articles in the internet encyclopaedia Wikipedia can serve as an indicator for the political stability of a country. This was proposed based on a "Wikipedia Dispute Index" developed by...

View the article


It's an interesting proposal, but I think world knowledge might be better served by a scientific study of wikipedia's biased worldview as a whole. Censorship might indeed be ‘antithetical to the philosophy of Wikipedia’, but my own experience as a former wikipedia editor over a period of 18 months is that censorship through systemic bias is actually the norm in certain politically-charged wikipedia topic areas. Wikipedia is dominated editorially by stridently conservative Americans, most of its administrators are American, and the dominant, conservative political and historical narrative that motivates them is essentially "American". The end result is that certain articles are heavily biased to favour an insular, mainstream American point of view; whereas content, if it is to be truly encyclopaedic, is supposed to incorporate a balanced range of views on any given subject. Even American views that deviate from the mainstream paradigm are deemed "fringe" and/or "unreliable". What a load of crap.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 19th 9 14, 3:46am