Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Wikipedia’s article on Obamacare is a heavily censored, utopian puff piece
wordpress ^ | October 15, 2013 | Dan from Squirrel Hill

Posted on 10/15/2013 2:47:56 AM PDT by grundle

Wikipedia’s article on Obamacare is a heavily censored, utopian puff piece that ignores Obamacare’s real world problems

Wikipedia’s Obamacare article ignores almost every single criticism of Obamacare that has been reported on by the news, and of the few that it does mention, it severely understates the problem. Some of these criticisms did get added to the article, but they were deleted.

So, some crazy person suggested, on the article’s talk page, that a few specific criticisms be added to the article, such as the healthcare.gov website not working, the large number of employers who have switched to a 29 hour work week (the article mentions, but severely understates, this problem), Obama’s broken promise of letting people keep their insurance, Obamacare “rate shock,” the politicians and unions who supported Obamacare but requested and obtained waivers for themselves, and a few other things. And this person posted links to reliable sources for all of them.

Not only were these suggestions deleted from the talk page, but the user who posted these suggestions was banned.

As a result, wikipedia’s article on Obamacare is about the promises of Obamacare, instead of the actual real world results of Obamacare.

Of course this violates wikipedia’s policy of requiring articles to be true and accurate and unbiased, but hey, wikipedia is controlled by Obama supporters – all the conservatives and libertarians who who tried to balance out the various Obama articles with reliably sourced criticism have been banned from wikipedia for doing so.



TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: mediabias; obamacare; wikipedia

1 posted on 10/15/2013 2:47:56 AM PDT by grundle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: grundle

My university frat mate tried to edit “libtard” on wiki and he was always edited out with a warning. He’s working on his PHD in Languages, works for the State Dept on foreign missions and that still wasn’t enough for these turds on wiki.


2 posted on 10/15/2013 2:56:47 AM PDT by max americana (fired liberals in our company last election, and I laughed while they cried (true story))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle
Some have labeled it wiki graffiti.

I obtained some information from DoJ links cited in a wiki article; the stats were about crime rates of minorities and I posted the information here on FR.

Those links and the data from the DoJ statistics were deleted from the wiki article and there was a debate raging there over whether or not information like that should be on wiki.

3 posted on 10/15/2013 3:09:26 AM PDT by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle

The page on Pinochet/Allende is pretty annoying too.

And is it just me or are they pushing the use of metric units?

It really is too bad about Wiki’s libtard bias given how popular it is.


4 posted on 10/15/2013 3:11:24 AM PDT by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle

Highly volatile progressive subjects (Obamacare, climate change, etc.) are never to be trusted on wiki. The wiki gardeners will defend their dogmatic views with extreme prejudice against any alternative viewpoint; even if the alternative view is truthful. Propaganda and sophistry is the dark side of Wikipedia.


5 posted on 10/15/2013 3:25:08 AM PDT by Liaison
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yardstick
It really is too bad about Wiki’s libtard bias given how popular it is.

And it's a pretty good source on the non-political-slanted articles. I've edited some of them successfully.

6 posted on 10/15/2013 4:24:53 AM PDT by luvbach1 (We are finished.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: luvbach1

I have edited some before, never got one to stick.


7 posted on 10/15/2013 5:33:41 AM PDT by Clinging Bitterly (R.I P. my old FRiend and neighbor Blackie Owens. Be ever vigilant!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson