One of the biggest lies being spouted at Wikipedia is the one about how there is generally
a NPOV. Wikipedia administrator David Gerard recently wrote on this mailing list,
"NPOV is our key innovation. Much more radical than letting anyone edit the
website." In fact, Wikipedia is a battleground in which the opinions of the most
competitive group win out, rather than some theoretical neutral POV. Many of you are far
more knowledgeable about the POV pushers at Wikipedia and know exactly how patently false
the NPOV doctrine is.
A Wikipedia article was recently written about Alan Cabal that, in my opinion, met
Wikipedia's notability standards beyond a doubt
(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MichaelQSchmidt/sandbox_The_unloved_artic…). It was
speedy deleted on March 30th, 2009 within hours of being re-created. A deletion review
followed which was conducted like a 4th AfD and the outcome was that the speedy delete was
upheld (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2009_March_30).
Throughout there was talk of keeping one's personal views to oneself. Completely
ridiculous considering user Bali ultimate, who nominated the Alan Cabal article for speedy
deletion, later admitted that he had been watching its rewrite very closely for weeks and
that's why he had pounced! Immediately afterward I looked into David Gerard's
aphorism and, looking far back, found that he had said the same thing years ago on another
Wikipedia mailing list: "I think NPOV is our greatest
innovation, much more radical than letting anyone edit the website."
(
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2007-August/029947.html)
Now there is an ongoing discussion in the CounterPunch article about how mere mentions of
Alan Cabal are being expunged from the entire website
(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:CounterPunch#Expunging_Alan_Cable_.28Alan…).
The CounterPunch article already has a sordid history. For example, on
January 28th, 2009, user Jarjam copyedited the CounterPunch article to say,
"CounterPunch has also been
criticized for publishing articles by
authors such as Alan Cabal and Daniel A. McGowan who have
defended the pro-Hitler persepective of Holocaust deniers such as Ernest Zundel. Zundel is
the author of 'The Hitle We Loved and
Why'."(http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=CounterPunch&…;oldid=263748961).
Nearly two months later this "unsourced libellous claim of contributors being
pro-Hitler" was removed by user Rd232, on March 22nd 2009 to be exact
(
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=CounterPunch&diff=278994805&a…)8994056).
Instead of getting it right, Alan Cabal's article "Star Chamber Redux: the
Prosecution of Zundel" was simply left out of the article and then on April 5th,
2009, user Verbal removed the last mention of Alan Cabal that remained in the CounterPunch
article
(
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=CounterPunch&diff=281912735&a…)0865106).
David Gerard truly believes there is a NPOV on this website, and has even defended his
ownership over his future Barlett quotation: "Mostly I'm the person I know
of calling it Wikipedia's greatest
innovation ;-p much more so than merely letting anyone edit the
website. Are there others?" (June 2008, David Gerard,
http://infoholics-anonymous.blogspot.com/2008/06/changing-world-via-wikiped…)
Such a thorough job has been done this past week of wiping Wikipedia clean of any mention
of Alan Cabal that even the Wikipedia article for New York Press no longer lists him as a
former contributor
(
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=New_York_Press&diff=281915790…)5246572).
David Gerard so firmly believes that Wikipedia has a NPOV that he can be found repeating
again and again, "Wikipedia’s fundamental content policy of Neutral Point of View is,
in
my opinion, its greatest innovation - far greater than merely letting
anyone edit the website." ( September 2007, David Gerard)
(
http://ivo.co.za/2007/09/20/wikipedia-as-efficient-market/) On his blog: "I consider
the Neutral Point Of View policy our most important innovation, far more so than letting
anyone edit the site." (
http://davidgerard.co.uk/notes/2007/12/17/rorschach-knols/)
(December 2007, David Gerard).
Probably the reason Alan Cabal has been viciously persecuted by Wikipedians for over a
year now is because he has defended the freedom of speech of holocaust denier Ernst
Zundel. But then again Alan Cabal has written so many controversial articles over the
years that I guess Wikipedians could have many reasons for suppressing his biography and
work. For the last time, I leave you with another permutation of what is surely David
Gerard's greatest quote: "NPOV is Wikipedia's greatest innovation - far
greater than letting any idiot edit the website."
(
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.science.linguistics.wikipedia.english/92817)
Sincerely,
Bill Carter