wikiHow

[The Idler]

I don't know if anyone uses this, but I have started a Left-Wing Project on wikiHow (http://www.wikihow.com/wikiHow:Left-Wing) to combat right-wing bias.

[Sean]

Hahah, prepare to defend it with your life. Political howtos are trollbait. Besides, given some of the ridiculous howtos on that site (how to stop being in love with an anime character) and some of the grossly inaccurate advice that articles are reverted back to even when correct, I wouldn't recommend my worst enemy to go there for advice. Its a nice idea though, but its really like asking someone in the street to explain how to do something. Normally that crazy guy that yells at pidgeons and insists that edison stole his ideas.

[Sugar Hill Kevis]

You should get involved with the RevLeft wiki http://www.revleft.com/wiki

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

I sometimes change the advice on that site to thinks such as "scratch your balls slowly while nodding at her" or something along those lines.

[ls]

Uncyclopedia (http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com) is much better. :p

I mean come on, this latest howto on writing Serj Tankian lyrics is spot-on http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/HowTo:Write_Serj_Tankian_Lyrics.

[RedAnarchist]

wikiHow seems to be full of conservatives and bible bashers. There was one where it was teaching women how to be a good wife, and it sounded like that 1950s pamphlet. I tried to change it and make it far more progressive than it was. I'm not sure how the article looks today, but I doubt many people take the advice given there seriously anyway.

[The Idler]

I started How to Understand Das Kapital (http://www.wikihow.com/Understand-Das-Kapital) but would appreciate constructive improvements from anyone more learned about the theory.

[The Idler]

The discussion page for How to Understand the Russian Revolution (http://www.wikihow.com/Discussion:Understand-the-Russian-Revolution) is being hijacked by Tsarists.

[Q]

The discussion page for How to Understand the Russian Revolution (http://www.wikihow.com/Discussion:Understand-the-Russian-Revolution) is being hijacked by Tsarists.
Don't bother, you will lose this. I've never heard of WikiHow before, so I don't quite understand the significance of trying to edit it for a more pro-worker view.

[mel]

I've never heard of WikiHow before, so I don't quite understand the significance of trying to edit it for a more pro-worker view.

This seems like a bit of an odd position to take to me. You may not have heard of it, but many people have, and it's often one of the first few google results when somebody looks up a "how to" question. It would be good to have a legitimate position represented on such a highly visible website, though I am with you that we would probably lose the editing war anyway.

[The Idler]

Don't bother, you will lose this. I've never heard of WikiHow before, so I don't quite understand the significance of trying to edit it for a more pro-worker view.I've added Leon Trotsky's and John Reed's books.

[The Idler]

Understand the Russian Revolution (http://www.wikihow.com/Understand-the-Russian-Revolution) is under further attack (mainly on the discussion page as I managed to get the main article protected from normal users) but from a US Republican (and wikiHow admin) who has nominated it for deletion for "inaccuracy". Fighting a war on two fronts is difficult. Where are the Leninists when you need them?

[NecroCommie]

I posted once, but it's not like they are going to understand logic. They just ignore the visitor messages as your sock puppets.

[NecroCommie]

Here's an idea! One should make "how to debate rationally" and post it to those wankers. Generally speaking also there seems to be a large demand for such an article. It should start by making a distinct difference between a claim and an argument for a claim. Most people seem to find it impossible to understand such elaborate abstract concepts. :glare:

It should also warn about using philosophically empty arguments such as authority, strawmen or ad hominem. Also the general attitude seems to be misplaced with a lot of people. Some people pick a stance first and then choose the evidence that supports it. In reality it goes the other way around. Also, it helps in a debate if you're right.