wikipedia correction idea

[SocialismIsCentrist]

likeminded folk here,

i've had a notion, that perhaps some of us should band together and edit wikipedia in particular ways to reduce acceptance of some of the ideas of the right.

the right as a favoured term for unregulated, pro-business, corporate facist economics: "Free Trade"

we on the left to the confused masses will sound and do sound nutty in the face of their properganda. When we object to things like "free trade." and say, "down with free trade..."

well 'Free' is a very strong word. it is used all around, a testiment to its positive strength and conoctations - in the shops, buy one, get one free. free is a strong prejudicial word when describing issues.

we can and should challenge the use of the words like Free Trade as preducial and encourage people to favour 'Unregulated Trade' a less biased alternative.

to that end. I have modified a few wikipedia entries removing where i can terms like 'free trade' in favour of 'unregulated trade' in the descriptions of economic systems of various countries. often they get changed back though. ones that stay is where a rightist has written, "..some argue that blah blah blah." we centrists (true centre ground is socialism btw) can add counter arguments, "..and others argue that.."

i did this for economy of england:


The GDP from the farming sector is argued by some to be a small return on the subsidies given but is argued by others that subsidy boosts security. And therefore is justified in the same way defence spending is.

wikipedia is increasingly important as a resource of considered opinion, we must challenge the right on this site.

the particular entry used to be:


Agriculture is heavily subsidised by the European Union's Common Agricultural Policy and it is not known how large a sector it would be if free market rules applied. The GDP from the farming sector is argued by some to be a small return on the subsidies given.



-
branding is important, and when arguing agaisnt unregulated trade, when people say, "im against free trade" to the layperson, it can sound like, "i'm against freedom, a form of freedom."

[Commie Rat]

we on the left to the confused masses will sound and do sound nutty in the face of their properganda. When we object to things like "free trade." and say, "down with free trade..."


Blatent Wiki vandalism will sever us no good purpouse and open us up to further attacks of this kind.

The best course of action is to ensure that all left related articals are relevent and true, and to ensure that that is true for right wing articals.

It is a Encylopedia for christs sake, not a communist soapbox.

[ComradeOm]

The GDP from the farming sector is argued by some to be a small return on the subsidies given but is argued by others that subsidy boosts security. And therefore is justified in the same way defence spending is.
Justified by whom? That statement is POV and wikipedia is no place for opinion pushing.

[RunningWithScissors]

...Justified by those who argue that subsidy boosts security. If not editing to make it NPOV in someone else's POV, it would at least need an edit to fix the sentence fragments...

[JKP]

Update the communism section.

[*PRC*Kensei]

question:

is wikipedia neutral (free media) / commercial (like google) ?

[jaster]

ya, i was looking up stuff about rachel corrie (american peace activist in palestine) and there were pictures of her(?) burning an american flag, definitly. something happened that was like this with mapquest, where they showed israel anf the OT as a single entity.

[SocialismIsCentrist]

Originally posted by Commie [email protected] 29 2006, 08:39 AM

we on the left to the confused masses will sound and do sound nutty in the face of their properganda. When we object to things like "free trade." and say, "down with free trade..."


Blatent Wiki vandalism will sever us no good purpouse and open us up to further attacks of this kind.

The best course of action is to ensure that all left related articals are relevent and true, and to ensure that that is true for right wing articals.

It is a Encylopedia for christs sake, not a communist soapbox.
it is not wiki vandalism, it is corrections, removal of bias. you do recognise that 'Free Trade' is the favoured term used by rightists to advocate Ultra-Capitalism?

why should wiki and others continue to use the rights favoured terminology? why? there is no why thats why.

[Dreckt]

Or why not create our own "Revolupedia"?

[Sankara1983]

This is an ill-advised idea. As an administrator on the English Wikipedia, I warn you that such contributions will generally not be welcomed with an open mind. Our editors are still struggling over Cold War events and people like Castro. We definitely don't need additional vicious political battles. Please reconsider.

[redstar2000]

I think it's one of those things that "if people want to do it, go ahead"...but it's not going to make a big difference.

I think people understand that Wikipedia is not necessarily reliable on matters of political controversy...you have to use some judgment and even plain common sense when quoting from it.

I find it most useful as a "quicksearch" tool for something I'm completely unfamiliar with...I wouldn't rely on it as some kind of "definitive account".

This thread belongs in the Practice Forum.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Lord Testicles]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2006, 07:19 PM
Or why not create our own "Revolupedia"?
There is a Red Wiki (http://www.redapollo.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page)

[TomRK1089]

As a member of no consequence at Wikipedia, I have to say the idea is just bad. You know the right will simply respond by editing leftist articles, the edits will escalate and eventually morph into Wiki flame wars. Not a good idea. Besides, anyone who believes political opinions from an encyclopedia without looking at the issues themselves is an idiot.

[Psy]

Originally posted by Skinz+Mar 29 2006, 07:53 PM--> (Skinz @ Mar 29 2006, 07:53 PM)
[email protected] 29 2006, 07:19 PM
Or why not create our own "Revolupedia"?
There is a Red Wiki (http://www.redapollo.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page)[/b]
From Red Wiki

Bakunin: Some crazy-ass Anarchist-theoretican!

Wow how unbiased <_<

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by Skinz+Mar 29 2006, 07:53 PM--> (Skinz @ Mar 29 2006, 07:53 PM)
[email protected] 29 2006, 07:19 PM
Or why not create our own "Revolupedia"?
There is a Red Wiki (http://www.redapollo.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page) [/b]
...shame its crap

[which doctor]

Originally posted by Psy+Mar 29 2006, 03:29 PM--> (Psy @ Mar 29 2006, 03:29 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2006, 07:53 PM

[email protected] 29 2006, 07:19 PM
Or why not create our own "Revolupedia"?
There is a Red Wiki (http://www.redapollo.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page)
From Red Wiki

Bakunin: Some crazy-ass Anarchist-theoretican&#33;

Wow how unbiased <_< [/b]
I I help edit it sometimes.

[Chrysalis]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2006, 06:16 PM
we can and should challenge the use of the words like Free Trade as preducial and encourage people to favour &#39;Unregulated Trade&#39; a less biased alternative.

to that end. I have modified a few wikipedia entries removing where i can terms like &#39;free trade&#39; in favour of &#39;unregulated trade&#39; in the descriptions of economic systems of various countries. often they get changed back though.
Wiki is not the "right" place to change ideas and promote one&#39;s ideology. Because nobody cares there, as you have already experienced. When such an important idea as Marxism gets to be put "on sale", at a discount price in a place like Wiki, you are doing more harm than good. Promote it where it matters: to those who are hungry for a change, any change in the political system. At least they would listen, if not already convinced.

To me writing on Wiki is like writing on dry-erase board using dry-erase marker: the written words are easy to erase using anything, including toilet paper. And even if no one comes to erase what&#39;s already there, the words just disintegrate by air.


Edit: I shall add that having said that, I agree with redstar that Wiki is good for what it can do--a quick reference, subject to double-checking with the original source/writers. A quick-look for factual items.

[Lord Testicles]

Originally posted by Psy+Mar 29 2006, 08:29 PM--> (Psy @ Mar 29 2006, 08:29 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2006, 07:53 PM

[email protected] 29 2006, 07:19 PM
Or why not create our own "Revolupedia"?
There is a Red Wiki (http://www.redapollo.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page)
From Red Wiki

Bakunin: Some crazy-ass Anarchist-theoretican&#33;

Wow how unbiased <_< [/b]
:lol: i was just pointing it out, i didnt say it was good.

[Honggweilo]

I&#39;m a hardcore wikipedia corrector when it comes to rants and flames to communist related articles, like exaggerated statistics, stupid onelinners, lies, scapegoating, biased articles ect.. but mostly on the dutch version, sometimes the english

i also tried to make a edit in the "United States" and changed "Federal Republic" into "Fascist Republic" a couple of times but i got warned, and i was logged in so i&#39;l refrain from doing that again :P

[patrickbeverley]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2006, 10:32 AM
I&#39;m a hardcore wikipedia corrector when it comes to rants and flames to communist related articles, like exaggerated statistics, stupid onelinners, lies, ... i also tried to make a edit in the "United States" and changed "Federal Republic" into "Fascist Republic"
Good to see you&#39;re completely opposed to Wiki vandalism :P