Replies

I have posted a message to the editor who immediately (within a minute) deleted the article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Antandrus

Deleted article
I would like to know why the aticle I created "Wikipedia Liberal Bias" was summarily deleted moments after it was created. There are a LOT of people that feel that a article on that issue would be helpful; why was it treated the same as blatant attack pages and gay smears? Is this a taboo subject?

A technique that repressive regimes use to suppress discussion on a particular topic is to make sure discussion on said topic stays fragmented and disorganized. By saying that this topic is covered elsewhere you can prevent discussion and the opportunity for people to compare experiences.

This may not be your goal; but how would your actions have differed it it was?

This over educated intellectual (I consider myself an intellectual) writes and wrote...

I don't quite understand the political POV-pushers, since it so unnecessarily stressful living that way; but then there really are people on earth who think they Know the Truth. It is common to mistake the death of curiosity and openness for knowledge, but perhaps this is just one way nature is merciful. Not only are things in the world not in black and white, but things in "black-and-white" are not in black and white. Failure to discern shades of gray may be a disability, an incapacity, or a form of cowardice: since it takes a whole lot more courage to see and accept the world with all its messy contradictions, than to view it all as Right, Wrong, Saved, Damned, My Way or the Highway.

And

I just deleted it again. No context, attack, inappropriate namespace for such a discussion: there are numerous reasons for deleting it; and the reason that trumps them all is that it was already deleted on AFD. And stop equating us to a "repressive regime", you're playing with a logical fallacy here. Please do NOT recreate your POV attack article again. And furthermore, I'd delete it whether it were "Wikipedia conservative bias" or "Wikipedia has no bias". All are inappropriate. Thanks. Antandrus (talk) 20:47, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Wotta maroon. See my tagline