Battles of Wikipedia

“There was the day in February [2008] when an editor replaced a photo of Hillary on her Wikipedia page with a picture of a walrus. Then there was the day this month [March 2008] when a Hillary supporter changed Obama’s bio so that it referred to him as ‘a Kenyan-American politician.'”

The problem of all encyclopedias, i.e. editorial bias, is sharpened by Wikipedia’s voluntary editing and real-time updating. These days it’s most obvious in the ongoing struggle over global warming/climate change (a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Democrat Party) in manipulated Wikipedia entries about the climate blog What’s Up With That. It’ll be back to political infighting in next year’s presidential campaigns.

Nevertheless, as you will see from the widget at the bottom left of this page, I support Wikipedia for what it indispensably is: a pretty good internet encyclopedia. You just have to read it with a suspicious eye sometimes.

But that was also true of the Britannica and the World Book set I had as a kid.

Via WUWT

3 responses to “Battles of Wikipedia

  1. I have a confession to make. Some time ago, while in an interminable wait at the local pharmacy, there was a magazine in the rack with a big pic of Hillary on the front. I could not resist.

    I drew a neat black mustache on her face and put it back up for all the customers to see while they waited. Took several days before it was removed.

  2. Heh. Good for you.

  3. I don’t see how a mustache can spoil the general effect in the case we are dealing with.