Jed Rothwell wrote:
Steven Krivit wrote:
2. You've established a method, using references, that is acceptable to the Wiki community. As you and others will note, your work has not been defaced or challenged.
So far. There is no telling when a skeptic will come and erase it. There is no control and no recourse.
Say what? Is this the same Wikipedia I'm familiar with?
There is control and there is recourse. A page which someone deletes for personal reasons can be retrieved. To get a page taken down permanently, you actually need to go through a somewhat formal process in which the community gets to vote on it.
What's more, the Wiki community is strongly opposed to graffiti on the pages: a page which is defaced can also be retrieved.
The 2004 election fraud page was a real flash point for a while, and one or two people tried -- at least twice -- to get it taken down, but the voting was in favor of keeping it, so it stayed. It was also defaced and subsequently retrieved, at least once. It's still there today; I just checked:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_U.S._Election_controversies_and_irregularities
Anarchopedia has _no_ control and _no_ recourse: like all anarchists, they depend on the innate goodness of humankind to keep the pages sane. But Wikipedia has a good size chunk of (volunteer) bureaucracy which gets involved in any attempt at deleting content.
At least, that's my impression.
