[Foundation-l] Board Resolution: Openness

[Fred Bauder]

> I cannot comment on the case of Kosovo, because I have no information
> about this case (as far as Wikipedia is concerned, that is), however,
> phenomena which resemble this description are very common in articles
> about conflicts, especially the Middle East conflict. There are groups
> of editors whose aim is watching an article so it would represent their
> political view, and these groups often file complaints about editors who
> try to edit the certain article in a different way, in order to have
> them blocked or the article put under special protection. The current
> administrative system of Wikipedia cannot handle these phenomena.
> Various attempts were made in order to handle this problem, but
> unfortunately, they just added damage rather than ease the problem. I
> can understand why Wikimedians with influence are reluctant to deal with
> problems related to politics. The Wikimedia projects are not political,
> and any decision about this kind of issues might be perceived as
> political decision. And yet, the problem is there and it grows and it
> cannot be avoided forever.
>
> Dror K

This seems to have happened at the article "Astrology" where the
astrology advocates were suckered by the skeptics into an edit war over
astrology being characterized as "pseudoscience". The POV editors even
cite my words to justify their nonsense, see the top of Talk:Astrology

What I say now counts for nothing of course.

Fred