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
> Why Jimmy Wales Allows "Vulva" on Wikipedia, Huffington Post (blog)
Newsfeed
post Tue 24th January 2012, 7:56pm
Post #1


Postmaster General
********

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



Why Jimmy Wales Allows "Vulva" on Wikipedia - Huffington Post (blog)
Since last Wednesday's Wikipedia blackout, face time with the site's founder Jimmy Wales has been a hot commodity. It might seem curious then, that when we sat down with Jimmy on Thursday evening -- just hours after Wikipedia came back online -- we ...

<a href="http://news.google.com/news/more?pz=1&ned=us&ncl=daoUH2l3g547XsM" target="_blank"></a>

View the article
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Tue 24th January 2012, 9:52pm
Post #2


Member
*********

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



A rather rambling discussion, but at least she points out that Wales is (inherently) a flip-flopper.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
carbuncle
post Tue 24th January 2012, 10:22pm
Post #3


Fat Cat
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,601
Joined: Sun 30th Mar 2008, 4:48pm
Member No.: 5,544



Come for the pictures of Muhammed - stay for the vulva...
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Ego Trippin' (Part Two)
post Wed 25th January 2012, 1:27am
Post #4


New Member
*

Group: Contributors
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun 13th Feb 2011, 3:07am
From: Ohio
Member No.: 42,413



QUOTE
Decisions made by Wikipedia editors are not law. But when it comes to determining what is 'normal' online -- and how much taboo we're willing to stomach on our Internet -- a Wikipedia referendum can count for just as much.


And isn't that alarming? I think that the average person really has a poor understanding of who makes up the Wikipedia community. I suspect that many people believe that even though "anyone can edit," people with serious credentials are in control of most of the articles in their fields. This goes hand in hand with a common misbegotten belief that most Wikipedia articles are heavily monitored and held to strict standards.

This brings a different sort of angle to the recent WR thread discussing the propriety of anonymity for Wikipedia editors. Anonymity doesn't just prevent editors from being held accountable for their edits; it also prevents the general public from seeing how many uneducated teenagers and basement-dwellers wield huge influence over the construction of Wikipedia's articles and procedures.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Web Fred
post Wed 25th January 2012, 10:18am
Post #5


Pervert & Swinger
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 739
Joined: Sat 13th Feb 2010, 3:25pm
From: Manchester, UK
Member No.: 17,141

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Well Wikipedia is asking for more female editors, so I suppose it's mandatory to allow vulva there.
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: 22nd 11 14, 4:21pm