"right-wingers" stomping on Fat Che's turf

[franksolich]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3833062

Oh my.

I know Fat Che doesn't own wikipedia, but he thinks he does.

Fat Che has been long gone from Skins's island; that's for "background."

ck4829  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-21-08 03:51 PM
Original message

Unhappy with Conservapedia, right wingers plan to hijack Wikipedia   

Last month, the Washington Times debuted a new weekly column by NewsBusters editor Matthew Sheffield. Fresh off his latest scoop that “liberals (are) more profane than conservatives,” he returned to the pages of the Times to exhort conservative activists to realize the dangers of Wikipedia and work to counter it by spending more time editing entries to better reflect their right-wing views:

Conservatives seems to be making another critical error regarding the online encyclopedia on the question of political bias. You can't entirely blame them either, considering that Wikipedia seems to have tilted leftward in a number of cases.

The reason for this is in the editing. Anyone can alter Wikipedia's entries, in most cases without even bothering to register for an account. What this means in practical terms is that people with enough determination to force their viewpoints on Wikipedia can do so.

Sheffield urges conservative activists not to retreat to the safety of Conservapedia because, well frankly, it’s a joke, and instead head once more into the breach by dedicating hours of their lives online to editing articles until they finally gain control.

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/2008/08/the_battle_for.ht...

madrchsod  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-21-08 03:56 PM
Response to Original message

1. most of the right wing are not intellectually capable of defending their arguments. although i disagree with the right of center i will "listen" to their positions if they are intelligently presented

Oh my.

ixion  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-21-08 04:00 PM
Response to Original message

2. when knowledge is politicized, there is no longer knowledge
   
just sayin'...

Oh yes.

NewJeffCT  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-21-08 04:08 PM
Response to Original message

3. I'll give the RW credit - they're persistent
   
they'll keep trying and trying and trying until the new the next version of Wikipedia comes along to the internet - then, when liberals and moderates move on to something newer, they'll be much freer to edit wikipedia and change history to their liking.

Then, eventually, they'll move over to whatever replaced wikipedia and again complain about how it's biased towards truth, honesty, facts and things like that.

Oh no.

bean fidhleir  (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-21-08 04:09 PM
Response to Original message

4. What's interesting is the amount of RW bias *already in* wiki
   
All anyone has to do is look. The political entries are particularly egregious.

It tells us, if anything does, that, to the RW, nothing less than 100% domination is acceptable. Which means that nothing less than 100% resistance can save us. Are we putting up even 10% resistance now? Not that I can tell.

tanyev  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-21-08 04:16 PM
Response to Original message

5. Awww, whatsa' matter? Not enough people paying attention to their truthiness?
   
That's why RWers have to be so obnoxious. Nobody would ever notice them otherwise.

Javaman  (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-21-08 04:31 PM
Response to Original message

6. And so began the great wiki wars.

Uh-huh.

[TheSarge]

madrchsod  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-21-08 03:56 PM
Response to Original message

1. most of the right wing are not intellectually capable of defending their arguments.

Anytime DUmmie...ANY time you want to find out how wrong that statement is...c'mon over.

[WinOne4TheGipper]

madrchsod  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-21-08 03:56 PM
Response to Original message

1. most of the right wing are not intellectually capable of defending their arguments.

Anytime DUmmie...ANY time you want to find out how wrong that statement is...c'mon over.

The DUmmie is intellectually incapable of finding us.

[TheSarge]

The DUmmie is intellectually incapable of finding us.

You know when I was using my original screen name...they would respond to that kind of challenge.

Perhaps I sohold switch back to it as a reminder as to whom they are dealing with