Comments on: Swastikipedia

By: Wikipedia as the big other | The Fish Pond

Wikipedia as the big other | The Fish Pond — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 13:14:58 +0000

[...] A whole entry on Jason Scottâ€™s issues with the Wikipedia article on swastika can be found here and a more technical analysis [...]

By: Oyunlar

Oyunlar — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 08:07:00 +0000

I should point out one thing, which is that I navigated to this page from a link on facebook.

By: Brian

Brian — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 11:34:06 +0000

Love the ‘community-built brick house’ analogy. Brilliant!

Sums up why I quit Wiki, and know of many other contributors who quit for similar reasons.

And just don’t even think about contributing id your specialism is even just a teeny weeny bit controversial

By: Andy Dyer

Andy Dyer — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:37:29 +0000

You don’t appear to mention Wikipedia’s heavy domination by the supporters of Israel. Strangely, in the last few months, the guys doing this seem increasingly to be semi-literate idiots. They have no sources other than hate-sites, and they’d have no place on the project were it not that they’re protected by admins. It’s sad to see real scholars being knocked back and driven off by these people, and it cannot be an accident.

By: Andy Dyer

Andy Dyer — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:36:57 +0000

You don’t appear to mention Wikipedia’s heavy domination by the supporters of Israel. In the last few months, the guys doing this seem to be semi-literate idiots. They’d have no place on the project and no credibility whatsoever were it not that they’re protected by admins.

By: daster

daster — Mon, 28 May 2007 08:11:36 +0000

http://japanga.forumlivre.com/index.php?

By: J Scott

J Scott — Wed, 27 Dec 2006 14:47:34 +0000

Right. Your linking the swastika and/or the Nazi Party to true political socialism indicates EXACTLY the same amount of logical rationality as linking The American Republican Party to Saddam’s Republican Guard, to the Soviet Socialist Republic and to the People’s Republic of China. You just got your little panties in a twist because you got stone-cold busted and embarrassed trying to pass-off a commonly used right-wing meme-driven lie (about the Nazis being “socialists”) as legitimate information. Get over it and go apply for a job as one of Rove’s Flying Monkeys, because FOX “News” NEEDS some new talent.

I have MY problems with the Wiki censors too, but not on THIS case. Pull your head out of your asscroft, get some therapy and get over yourself. This is a ‘big people world’ for ‘big pants people’. Now wipe those tears, wipe your butt and wipe that smile off your face, little man. Thaaaaaaaats a good lil’ feller.

http://www.rationalrevolution.net/articles/understanding_fascism.htm

By: mike

mike — Tue, 30 May 2006 03:19:32 +0000

Why don’t you program a system to view wikipedia articles that maps out edit wars and contested sections. That way a marked up text could show the history that you describe with high contended sections showing up bright red while others less contested areas are have different highlight to show community condenses. Wikipedia should be thought of as a social information base from which a dialectic can be observed.

There is not such thing as authoritative and absolutely true for everyone. There will always be differences of opinion either on the “extreme” margins or front and center. Wikipedia should be applauded for making this history of back and forth available and more people should consider this history as part of the â€œarticleâ€ they are reading. Accepting the current state of any piece of information as the end all on the subject is just blissfully ignorant of how Knolege systems work and propagate.

By: Deathunter

Deathunter — Fri, 26 May 2006 23:56:32 +0000

Wikipedia is good, it is useful for research and homework.

By: Car Loans

Car Loans — Fri, 12 May 2006 15:27:23 +0000

It is always better to repair then to replace.