We Won the Wikipedia ‘War’

Jeremy Sapienza, August 23, 2010

We took Wikipedia to task for their parroting of officialdom on Friday; since then, an explosion of comments and edits, some even reversed by other editors, have pushed the consensus away from declaring the Iraq War over. It now lists Operation Iraqi Freedom as having ended on August 19, 2010. It still repeats the canard that the remaining 50,000+ troops are simply for training purposes — though Gen. Odierno warns they could switch back at any moment — but let’s take what we can get.

There are still a few “dead-endersslogging against the stream of plain truth in the discussion area — won’t the Wiki-savvy among you weigh in with your own volley to protect this important correction? Whatever one’s opinion of Wikipedia, the fact remains it is a respected source and often its articles are taken at face value.




7 Responses to “We Won the Wikipedia ‘War’”

  1. What about the Israeli government starting four-year courses in how to change Wikipedia entires to reflect Zionist POVs? Last week's news. Discredits Wikipedia. Who among us has a government's budget to counter it?

  2. Very well said.

  3. OTOH, the Zionists' open declaration of their intentions by advertising these courses serves only to (further?) undermine Wikipedia's credibility. For this reason it would stand to reason that those who currently serve as Wikipedia's "gatekeepers" would go to any reasonable lengths possible to implement some sort of countermeasures to this naked attempt to (further?) politicize this popular online source of information. To do any less would result in Wikipedia's ultimate destruction.

  4. [...] to reconcile the “Iraq War is over” pronouncement with the 50,000 remaining troops, winning the fight against Wikipedia’s Iraq War entry (and why this reversal further proves the print media [...]

  5. [...] required to reconcile the “Iraq War is over” pronouncement with the 50,000 remaining troops, winning the fight against Wikipedia’s Iraq War entry (and why this reversal further proves the print media business [...]

  6. I've only ever made one post on Wikipedia…and that was to mention a comic book appearance of Torquemada.
    The only parts of Wikipedia that are any good are the ones that nobody cares about. It's an internet microcosm of officialdom; anything remotely political or religious is utter crap.

  7. Wikipedia has made the dumbing down of political knowledge easier, more direct, more anonymous and more insidious than ever before in the mass media. Ironically, Wikipedia is premised on the notion that editorial control of the encyclopedia is held by “editors” who affirm the values of freedom of information. Wikipedia tries to contrast itself plausibly with totalitarian regimes whose control of information is absolute; but Wikipedia has its own dark and secretive side. It can be degraded easily by intellectual frauds and shadowy rightwing cabals that form a power elite whose task is to censor politically charged topics, insert disinformation and remove dissenting views. Anyone who goes against the entrenched structures of the ruling elite will promptly find themselves banned and blacklisted.