The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #104107   Message #2129135
Posted By: Uncle_DaveO
19-Aug-07 - 11:24 AM
Thread Name: BS: Wicked Impediment on WikiPedia?!
Subject: RE: BS: Wicked Impediment on WikiPedia?!
I looked at Jeri's link, and found the following, and I have added my comments in bold:

The Republican Party and Iraq

The Republican Party edited Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath Party entry so it made it clear that the US-led invasion was not a "US-led occupation" but a "US-led liberation."

I'd say that's within the spirit of Wikipedia. The two expressions are equally subjective statements of opinion. I happen to agree with the "occupation" more so than "liberation", but neither is a matter of objective fact.

The CIA and casualties of war

A computer with a CIA IP address was used to change a graphic on casualties of the Iraq war by adding the warning that many of the figures were estimated and not broken down by class. Another entry on former CIA chief William Colby was edited to expand his cv.

Seems to me that both of these changes are entirely appropriate, assuming the figures were in fact estimated and not broken down, and that the facts in the expanded cv are correct. This use of Wikipedia is exactly what Wikipedia should be about.

I am sure I could go further (and I'm going to) through the article, and I'd find other changes which, at least by implication, are claimed to be illegitimate. I'm sure I would find plenty that are flat-out wrong, too. But not every change made by a party with a special interest is an intellectual crime against Wikipedia and the general public.

Dave Oesterreich