It is possible to provide arguments against the reliability of any
source whatever. (And in the other direction, it is possible to take
most sources and selectively quote them to provide evidence for
support for any position whatever.) It is possible to destroy the
integrity of any article by
I certainly wouldn't treat any blog entry too seriously. I merely
wanted to announce the official beginning of the Wikipedia US Election
2012 season!
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
Can anyone reading and who knows how the ITN section of the Main Page
works consider giving the Main Page errors process a prod to get
things moving?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Main_Page/Errors
I posted there this morning about how the blurb on the Japan
earthquake and tsunami is
On 14/03/2011, David Goodman dgge...@gmail.com wrote:
It is possible to provide arguments against the reliability of any
source whatever. (And in the other direction, it is possible to take
most sources and selectively quote them to provide evidence for
support for any position whatever.) It
Of course, if an interested minority party has effectively infinite money,
they can start to tip the scales.
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 4:13 PM, Ian Woollard ian.wooll...@gmail.comwrote:
On 14/03/2011, David Goodman dgge...@gmail.com wrote:
It is possible to provide arguments against the
Of course, if an interested minority party has effectively infinite
money,
they can start to tip the scales.
If they can benefit from LOTS of negative PR...
Fred
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011, David Goodman wrote:
It is possible to provide arguments against the reliability of any
source whatever. (And in the other direction, it is possible to take
most sources and selectively quote them to provide evidence for
support for any position whatever.) It is possible
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Ken Arromdee arrom...@rahul.net wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011, David Goodman wrote:
It is possible to provide arguments against the reliability of any
source whatever. (And in the other direction, it is possible to take
most sources and selectively quote them
The Koch brothers are mostly unknown. It is a known fact that they have
at
least one professional PR firm (New Media Strategies) working to monitor
their Wikipedia presence. That's certainly within their rights, and can
be
within the Wikipedia rules. It is Ken's assertion that there are
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011, The Cunctator wrote:
The Koch brothers are mostly unknown. ...
... It is Ken's assertion that there are many
people highly motivated to write misrepresentations and
unbalanced articles, though the evidence seems to point to there being
maybe a handful of such people.
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 6:13 PM, Ken Arromdee arrom...@rahul.net wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011, The Cunctator wrote:
The Koch brothers are mostly unknown. ...
... It is Ken's assertion that there are many
people highly motivated to write misrepresentations and
unbalanced articles, though
11 matches
Mail list logo
