Alexandre Oliva wrote:
[Wikipedia is] definitely not neutral ground.
I concur; there are different groups interested in presenting a particular view of things via Wikipedia articles. As I understand it, whose view is seen by many comes down to either who is connected to Wikipedia admins or who spends time reverting challenging edits.
But then, despite all of its failings, Wikipedia, like democracy, sucks, though they suck less than the known alternatives.
And, much like Firefox, Wikipedia articles are licensed such that if one wants to one could base a new work by copying something that went before and making changes to it. Firefox, for all of its problems, is still free software and thus very well-suited for being the base for other browsers. TorBrowser is an example of that.
Perhaps someone has done something comparable for Wikipedia as well? _______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss mailing list libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
