Posted on 03/27/2017 3:33:44 PM PDT by rightistight
UC Berkeley held a "Art + Feminism Wikipedia Edit-a-Thon" last week, training people who came on how to edit Wikipedia to me more feminist-friendly.
"Wikimedia’s gender trouble is well-documented," Berkeley's Event Calendar asserts. "While the reasons for the gender gap are up for debate, the effect is not: content is skewed by the lack of female participation. Let’s change that!"
Previous experience editing Wikipedia is not required, the event states: "Drop by the Wikipedia Edit-a-Thon, learn how to edit Wikipedia and make a few changes of your own!"
Students were invited to stay the entire afternoon correcting Wikipedia's "gender trouble" and were provided food and drinks.
The event was held on March 21 from 1-6 p.m. at the Moffitt Undergraduate Library. The event was sponsored by the UC Berkeley library.
Wikipedia isn’t Communist enough for their taste?
“Gender trouble.” Wiki-on-the-rag?
Have to start calling it “Wussipedia”.
Which failed entirely because everyone there refused to "make me a sandwich" or "get me a beer".
Ok. Now I won’t trust anything posted there.
I guess I won’t be going to Wikipedia anymore. #fakeinformation.
>>Have to start calling it “Wussipedia”.<<
More like “Rapeipedia.” Women are all empowered and strong except have all been “raped” by mean male thoughts.
Every single entry will end “and then all the womyn were raped.”
Because Wikipedia is accessible to anyone to edit I
wonder why such an “esteemed” institution as UC Berkeley
would bother with it. Do professors even allow Wikipedia as
a research source? Sure glad I went to good old
“learn by doing “ Cal Poly......
” to Fix Site “Gender Trouble”
Gender Trouble is a mental issue not an English issue!
Language trouble.. Someone forgot to use the masculine form of a verb.
Wikipedia is a good source for getting an overview of the subject and references to work from. It is not a primary source, but sure is helpful when you need to find out the essence of a subject quickly.
I wouldn't trust Wikipedia on any sociological subject, however. Even the references are likely to be suspect on those. I stick with science and other topics that are less susceptible to leftist propagandizing.
I sort of agree with you about Wiki when it comes to
definitions and minor points I might have forgotten.
And, yes, it provides a DEGREE of overview but for
Cal Berkeley to bother with it as the article indicates,
well, I suspect that their time could be better spent.
I think I might use Wiki to aim me in a previously
unknown direction but I wouldn’t want to use enough
of it to be compelled to have to cite it as a source
unless I was back in high school.
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.