Posted on 02/21/2006 11:42:25 PM PST by DizzyJim
Staffers of Harry Reid have convinced the management of Wikipedia to remove negative information about Reid from his article, and have "protected" the article against further editing.
Article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Reid
Deletion of negative information (note: Danny is the head Public Relations person at Wikipedia): http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harry_Reid&diff=39875461&oldid=39829348
Discussion of the Harry Reid staffer's intervention: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Harry_Reid#Protection
Liberals with their very own Great Firewall Of China
In August 2004, Limbaugh was reported to be dating CNN television personality Daryn Kagan.
In 1996, Al Franken released a bestselling book and CD titled Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot and Other Observations which included harsh criticism of Limbaugh and his allegedly meager fact-finding efforts. The "Fat" portion of the title of the book was a jibe at Limbaugh's weight and in-kind payback for his alleged rudeness on the radio and TV during the time in which the book was first published.
Following Limbaugh's admission of drug addiction, his detractors reviewed prior statements by him about drug addicts as examples of hypocrisy. Several statements from the 1990s were found, in particular, on October 5, 1995:
and in 1998:
And your point?
This web site, The Free Republic, is a precursor and established the model for knowledgeable contributor based information being made available in a widely accessible format outside of traditional media.
whats up with that?
I agree with most of that. Wikipedia, I'm sure, will shortly be supplanted by a more authoritative enterprise with a less juvenile name.
for some things not nesicerially politics wikipedia is nice and comes in handy.
L
They can run, but they can't hide.
http://www.discoverthenetwork.com/default.asp
So you noticed that I joined on George Washington's birthday. Such an honor :-)
Wikipedia is a heavily used site. Shouldn't we watch what their upper management is doing?
Doesn't seem to be true, or, at least, not completely true. Wikipedia tagged the entry:
This page is protected from editing until disputes have been resolved. Please discuss changes on the talk page or request unprotection. (Protection is not an endorsement of the current page version.)
The page lists the main, disputed entry, followed by an alternate view of Mr. Harry Reid's life and career.
My trust in Wikipedia is mixed, at best. Still, I confess. I do click on their articles when Google googles them up. Then, if it is a subject of interest to me, I'll cross reference their explanations with Britannica's, followed by articles from our library's database.
Discussion of the Harry Reid staffer's intervention . . .
Again, there is no legal issue at stake here. Yes, we have been contacted by Harry Reid's office. They have raised certain issues, which we are investigating. Both Jimbo and I were away for a few days on Wikipedia business. It is now the weekend. I will be contacting Reid's office on Tuesday (Monday being a holiday). WP:OFFICE protection is intended as a temporary measure until things can be settled. Settled means to the satisfaction of all parties involved, and not just to the satisfaction of certain editors. As a reminder to everyone, Wikipedia is not a newspaper or a political blog. It is an encyclopedia. Editing does not mean dumping information but presenting the information in a suitable manner too . . .
Interesting back and forth there. Wikipedia strikes me as rather open about all this.
tallhappy, I sincerely hope you werent implying any sort of trolldom. I hate when posters do that for no reason. People have to join sometime! And if you werent, them I'm sorry, please disregard my rant. =P
Welcome to FreeRepublic DizzyJim!
The protection notice you quote is a standard boilerplate notice, and does not fit in this case. You have to read the discussion to get the reason for protection in this case.
The discussion also explains how Danny had the negative (but factual) information removed first before he protected the article.
He just doesn't want it be known that his hands are dirty with Abramoff money too.
bttt
Most newbies that start threads on their 1st day are trolls. I haven't kept a running count, but 90% plus seems about right. This doesn't appear to be the case at this time on this poster, at least by what's been presented on this thread.
Welcome to FreeRepublic DizzyJim!
2nds...
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.