Another Wikipedia editor has been climate topic banned

[scribblet]

I knew Wiki could be edited and used for propaganda purposes, this bear it out. What else is edited and used as propaganda?

This is interesting and really does speak to the validity of Wiki and what propaganda we are fed so will maybe lead to a more balanced debate.

Wikipedia announced that it has fired its long time climate editor William Connolley who has been found to have changed over 5,000 Wikipedia articles to promote AGW catastrophic speculation.

http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2010/10/14/going.html

Wikipedia reflects the state of play in science in microcosm - a tight-knit group with access to power and a zeal for using it drives the alleged consensus where they want it to go and long after the rot set in people with greater authority than the zealous decide to act.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/10/14/lawrence-solomon-global-warming-propagandist-slapped-down/#ixzz12WbotUDa

William Connolley, arguably the world’s most influential global warming advocate after Al Gore, has lost his bully pulpit. Connolley did not wield his influence by the quality of his research or the force of his argument but through his administrative position at Wikipedia, the most popular reference source on the planet.

Through his position, Connolley for years kept dissenting views on global warming out of Wikipedia, allowing only those that promoted the view that global warming represented a threat to mankind. As a result, Wikipedia became a leading source of global warming propaganda, with Connolley its chief propagandist.

His career as a global warming propagandist has now been stopped, following a unanimous verdict that came down today through an arbitration proceeding conducted by Wikipedia. In the decision, a slap-down for the once-powerful Connolley by his peers, he has been barred from participating in any article, discussion or forum dealing with global warming. In addition, because he rewrote biographies of scientists and others he disagreed with, to either belittle their accomplishments or make them appear to be frauds, Wikipedia barred him — again unanimously — from editing biographies of those in the climate change field.

I have written several columns for the National Post on Connolley’s role as a propagandist. Two of them appear here and here.

more on wiki

http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=6185

http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Finally+common+sense+global+warming/3675534/story.html#ixzz2hAQlQeBp

[Jack Weber]

The confiscatory Leftist cabal has its' apparatchiks everywhere!!!!

Edited October 17, 2010 by Jack Weber

[scribblet]

well, it seems they do on Wiki LOL

[BubberMiley]

well, it seems they do on Wiki LOL

Or, rather, it would seem they don't on Wiki LOL

[waldo]

I knew Wiki could be edited and used for propaganda purposes, this bear it out. What else is edited and used as propaganda?

This is interesting and really does speak to the validity of Wiki and what propaganda we are fed so will maybe lead to a more balanced debate.

Wikipedia announced that it has fired its long time climate editor William Connolley who has been found to have changed over 5,000 Wikipedia articles to promote AGW catastrophic speculation.

nice scribblet... a two-fer on linking to deniers... you hit both the 'bishop' and Solomon! It's clear you and journalistic challenged Solomon know nothing of the wiki process - at least the denier blogger 'bishop' properly references the "topic banned" designation. Unfortunately, they all seem to skip right over mentioning Connolley is but one of a grouping of 15 editors (temporarily) topic banned... and why? Because that mix of 15 editors represents a volatile mix of proponents, skeptics and outright deniers. They aren't playing nice together and wiki has sought an interim solution. Your use of the word 'fired' has no contextual meaning within wiki... your designating Connolley as "it's long time climate editor" leaves an improper impression that he is/was, a/the, single editor. Of course, deniers would attempt to single out Connolley for their own agenda... hey scribblet?

you really should educate yourself on the inner workings of wiki... something that would certainly introduce it's strengths to you - and allow you to understand, in context, it's weaknesses and how, ultimately, those weaknesses are managed and dealt with. Really, c'mon... if you're at all concerned about a wiki topic/page simply look at it's editing history - it's all there in full audit. If you're in the know, you understand wiki's strengths and inherent weaknesses - if you're not in the know, you'll make grandiose statements about propaganda... just like you did.

[scribblet]

Or, rather, it would seem they don't on Wiki LOL

Well, not any more LOL I read elsewhere but can't find it now about a couple of other people who also were suspended, so at least these people were caught. Wiki is really not the best, most accurate or balanced site to go to for info.

This guy contributed to climate change disinformation and fear mongering of the worst kind.

Read more: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/10/14/lawrence-solomon-global-warming-propagandist-slapped-down/#ixzz12i6SLAVs

[waldo]

Well, not any more LOL I read elsewhere but can't find it now about a couple of other people who also were suspended, so at least these people were caught. Wiki is really not the best, most accurate or balanced site to go to for info.

are you that desperate you need to, again, post the same link to the same dishonest, charlatan, denier journalist, Lawrence Solomon? Save yourself further embarrassment... do a quick search around MLW forums - Solomon's history is well documented.

... you read elsewhere, "a couple of other people were also suspended". Hey, nice to see you've backed off your earlier use of the word "fired". In my reply to you I mentioned the grouping of 15 editors that were topic banned... I also highlighted their makeup included a cross-section of proponents, skeptics and outright deniers. Somehow you felt obliged to ignore that and repeat your concerted attack on a single person (a proponent), by linking once again, to Solomon's POS article. Apparently, in your one-sided denier world, you have no qualms over the actions of your favoured grouping of wiki editors who were similarly topic banned.

like I said, spend some time and educate yourself on wiki - it's strengths, weaknesses and how those weaknesses are managed and worked through. You might also recognize that within wiki, topic banning of editors is not that unusual a practice... it's more an interim 'time out' measure adopted to attempt to bring settlement/civility to heavily contested areas.

[scribblet]

YAWN..... ZZZZZZ

[waldo]

YAWN..... ZZZZZZ

ya, ya, scribblet... you don't likeee when someone calls you on your bullshit - hey?

[scribblet]

Yawn ZZZZZ

A propaganda activist rewrote over 5000 Wikipedia articles on climate change to ensure they complied with his alarmist line. - he's lost his bully pulpit

Edited October 19, 2010 by scribblet

[bill_barilko]

How can someone be fired from a volunteer position?

[waldo]

How can someone be fired from a volunteer position?

scribbler is tired

'fired' has much more distortion impact... see scribblet literally echo the denialsphere... it's all in the language of denier distortion and outright lies.

[scribblet]

I've read different takes on it, some say fired, some say canned, some say banned from writing about climate change, either way he's not going to be allowed to propagate his well - propaganda

he also rewrote biographies of scientists and others he disagreed with, to either belittle their accomplishments or make them appear to be frauds,

http://www.nationalpost.com/m/blog.html?b=fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/10/14/lawrence-solomon-global-warming-propagandist-slapped-down&s=Opinion

One wonders what else is iffy on wiki although I think we all knew it was never really impartial. In fact, I've read that some schools have banned wiki as a reference source.

Edited October 19, 2010 by scribblet

[waldo]

Yawn ZZZZZ

A propaganda activist rewrote over 5000 Wikipedia articles on climate change to ensure they complied with his alarmist line. - he's lost his bully pulpit

oh... upon greater deep thinking you have more to add than simple zzzzzzzzz - hey?

care to comment on the actual dispute... the actual 15 editors "topic banned" (an interim solution - essentially a time out). Which of those 15 editors, similarly topic banned, wrote, in your words, "propaganda... to ensure they complied with their denial line". Which of those 15 editors, who, in your words, "lost their bully pulpit", do you have no concerns over... that your linked POS Solomon article has no concerns over?

so now you've linked to the same POS Solomon article 3 times now. Perhaps we should start firing back the litany of what's been written about the denier Solomon... you know, your go-to guy (3 posted links to the same article worth). Go back to sleep scribbler... you're way too tired to make any sense - hey?

[dre]

Well... on the bright side the guy was FIRED for it... That kind of thing would get an anchor at Fox or MSNBC a huge promotion and a raise.

[fellowtraveller]

Well... on the bright side the guy was FIRED for it... That kind of thing would get an anchor at CBC lifetime tenure, an Order of Canada,a huge promotion, a raise and a chance to be Governor General.

There, fixed it for you, Wiki- style.

[wyly]

There, fixed it for you, Wiki- style.

wiki, denier blogs, Answers from Yahoo and tabloids the top go to sources for for deniers...evidence from actual respectable science sites/journals, we're still waiting for those... ...

[BubberMiley]

One wonders what else is iffy on wiki although I think we all knew it was never really impartial. In fact, I've read that some schools have banned wiki as a reference source.

I'm still impressed that someone thinks that wikipedia taking strong measures to eliminate bias is irrefutable proof that it is not impartial.