It's always sad to see this cast as a left/right thing - or "Wikipedia has a liberal bias". We equally have huge problems with right wing agenda's on some articles. And most of the BLP issues aren't related to politics, but to all manner of "sides" (sexuality,political,ethnic,historical and those are the non-trivial examples). Biographies are a mess; we have detailed criticism of fairly non-notable people who've done nothing except piss off the wrong person once or twice. And we have others who are so beloved of their followers that trying to write any fair criticism is like pounding a brick wall. With a lemon. Tom On 23 August 2011 12:11, Tony Sidaway <tonysidaway(a)gmail.com> wrote:

Hmm nice that he's not entirely relying on the Siegenthaler incident and has quoted something beyond 2007. But his reliance on a 2009 Daily Mail story about 20,000 editors vetting changes via flagged revisions http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1208941/Free-edit-Wikipedia-appoint… Does leave me wondering how much he really understands the pedia, and whether perhaps he gives preferential treatment to sources he agrees with over those he doesn't. Core to his critique is the idea that highly active editors who do most edits must perforce be leftwing, which rather misses the point that the fixers of typos and reverters of vandalism are not necessarily the editors who add all the content. I for one have no problem with the idea that Conservapedia will often be to the right of us, or Liberapedia to the left http://liberapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page Now a thoughtful critique that compared us to both of those and also to reality would be interesting, but a Conservative criticising us for being less Conservative than Conservapedia.... It would be worrying if we didn't seem relatively Liberal compared to them. As for the Che Guevara article, as well as detailing his marital infidelities it describes him as "feared for his brutality and ruthlessness" and details why. It also recounts an incident of him killing someone in cold blood. Economic incompetence "Whatever the merits or demerits of Guevara’s economic principles, his programs were unsuccessful.[130]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Che_Guevara#cite_note-Ke… Guevara's program of "moral incentives" for workers caused a rapid drop in productivity and a rapid rise in absenteeism". Lastly an overly confrontational attitude that failed to engage the Bolivians. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Che_Guevara Multiple separate and sourced criticisms that to my mind make this far more balanced than David Swindle claims. WSC On 23 August 2011 12:11, Tony Sidaway &lt;tonysidaway(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

On 23 August 2011 12:11, Tony Sidaway &lt;tonysidaway(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: ... For completeness, here is part 2 of David Swindle's series: http://frontpagemag.com/2011/09/01/how-the-left-conquered-wikipedia-part-ii… Here he focuses on what he thinks are "three unwritten rules that pervade the treatment of most leftists on Wikipedia." He summarises them as follows [1] Quote feeble critics only so they can be rebutted. [2] Give the Benefit of the Doubt to the Jew-Haters. [3] Leave out the Embarrassing ‘Personal Life’ details. As examples he cites the biographies of Al Gore, Al Sharpton and Morris Dees, The first two will need no introduction, but the latter of these was the relatively less well known founder of the Southern Poverty Law Center.