Example Two: Same Old Stuff
Ellen Schrecker article now reads,
"John Earl Haynes charged that "Schrecker… devotes hundreds of pages to demonizing opposition to communism in any form." Schrecker argues that her position is that "in this country[,] McCarthyism did more damage to the constitution than the American Communist party ever did."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellen_W._Schrecker
Hence Wikipedia is used as a soapbox to defame Prof. John Earl Haynes of the Library of Congress as an appologist for McCarthyism by equating McCarthyism with "opposition to communism in any form". This method of allowing "criticsim of critics" for NOPV was raised at Talk:Chip Berlet while the page was protected from editing an unsubstaniated defamatory charge against Mr. Laird Wilcox as "an unethical reporter". I asked,
"...is this the normal format in Wiki articles were "Criticism" subhead have been created for NPOV, where than the critics are then smeared..."
A neutral editor proposed "criticism of the criticism...should be pruned out."
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chip_Berlet&diff=prev&...
I of course was charged with personal attacks and this group of editors continues to push POV under license as a result of the evidence now admitted to have been errantlly disallowed in my case.
Nobs01
On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 11:24:55 -0700, "Rob Smith" nobs03@gmail.com wrote:
Hence Wikipedia is used as a soapbox to defame Prof. John Earl Haynes of the Library of Congress as an appologist for McCarthyism by equating McCarthyism with "opposition to communism in any form".
Doesn't read like that to me. I'd say that was a pretty fair statement, sourced in both cases. But then, I'm a notorious pinko commie subversive :-)
Guy (JzG)
Anti-communism = McCarthyism is like
saying Communism = Stalinism.
I'm sure you'd get an arguement there.
Nobs01
On 11/26/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 11:24:55 -0700, "Rob Smith" nobs03@gmail.com wrote:
Hence Wikipedia is used as a soapbox to defame Prof. John Earl Haynes of the Library of Congress as an appologist for McCarthyism by equating McCarthyism with "opposition to communism in any form".
Doesn't read like that to me. I'd say that was a pretty fair statement, sourced in both cases. But then, I'm a notorious pinko commie subversive :-)
Guy (JzG)
On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 16:25:43 -0700, "Rob Smith" nobs03@gmail.com wrote:
Anti-communism = McCarthyism is like saying Communism = Stalinism.
But that's not what it's saying. I think you may be looking at it through the filter of past disputes.
Guy (JzG)
Yes. There are two issues (a) smearing a critic when a critic is included for NPOV purposes; (b) smearing a critic by innuendo. My raising this issues 14 months ago resulted in (1) punitive action against me (2) finally removing the unsubstaniated smears and innuendo from another article.
Again the question, does it take a breaching experiment and the risk of punitive action to get unsubstantiated smears removed ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chip_Berlet&diff=prev&...
On 11/27/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 16:25:43 -0700, "Rob Smith" nobs03@gmail.com wrote:
Anti-communism = McCarthyism is like saying Communism = Stalinism.
But that's not what it's saying. I think you may be looking at it through the filter of past disputes.
Guy (JzG)
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 13:21:52 -0700, "Rob Smith" nobs03@gmail.com wrote:
Yes. There are two issues (a) smearing a critic when a critic is included for NPOV purposes; (b) smearing a critic by innuendo. My raising this issues 14 months ago resulted in (1) punitive action against me (2) finally removing the unsubstaniated smears and innuendo from another article.
So you say, but I didn't read it like that.
Guy (JzG)