I sent a message to this list explaining why Martin Harper
(MyRedDice), and Mr Natural Health, needs to immediately
stop their campaign of reversions and politically motivated
mass deletions. Most of what I sent was a detailed
explanation of precisely why Martin's actions are a clear
violation of NPOV, and why they constitute censorship.
These explanations were not written by me, but rather by
Jimbo Wales, Wikipedia founder.
Jimbo writes:
In the present case, we see why deletion is bad. We
are
left with a horribly broken presentation in which readers
are unable to discover why it might be that, despite the
PLO officially no longer calling for the destruction of
Israel, and Arafat himself announcing a right to exist,
the majority of Palestinians polled support the
destruction ofIsrael.
We can only come to understand that better when we come to
understand Arafat's duplicity, and the anti-Israel
propaganda that is rampant in the Palestinian culture. But
because some supporters of Palestine are uncomfortable
with
that material, it is censored from Wikipedia. No, I
don't
think censorship is too strong a word."
Ray Saintonge (Ec) mistook this for a quote from me, It
wasn't. Ray writes:
This seems like a blatant attempt to manipulate a
text,
or a series of assumedly accurate facts in support of
propaganda for the Israeli POV.
No, it isn't. Your accusations are angry and unfounded. On
Wikipedia, NPOV policy demands tha we provide a situation's
context. Context requires that we provide quotes from many
different people, at different points in their lives
(especially if they offer multiple contradictory
statements, like Yassir Arafat.)
You are still assuming that Arabs are liars, and that any
quote from them "makes Arabs look bad and Jews look good".
But that just is not true. The fact that you just don't get
is that many Arabs have views that differ from your own.
For instance, the Palestinian Authority has funded the
publication of Adolph Hitler's Mein Kampf, and funds
teachers and preachers who teach holocaust denial. That
isn't an "anti-Arab" statement. In fact, to them these
positions are PRO-Arab. You disagree? Fine; if you can't
stomach reading views that you disagree then go away. But
don't use our encyclopedia to rewrite facts to make all
Palestinian Arabs look like left-wing pro-peace people.
Where I come from, this is called lying.
For the last year, many Wikipedians on this list have acted
in rage, and lashed out in mass-censorship, when facts have
appeared which showed Arab leaders to have views which are
not democratic, or are anti-Jewish or anti-Chrisitian. We
have been told by left-wing Wikipedia contributors that
these views are "anti-Arab and pro-Jewish".
The problem is that they are not anti-Arab, nor are they
pro-Jewish. They are just honest points of view from people
who happen to be Arab leaders. We have to allow our
encyclopedia the ability to state such views, even when we
disagree with them.
Ray closes his letter with a personal attack on me, which
clearly is encouragement for Martin and MNH to continue
damaging the encyclopedia. This is called biting one's nose
off to spite one's face. Should I respond in kind? Should I
find people who hate Ray and encourage them to violate
Wikipedia policy - simply to enrage Ray?
Some people like to talk the talk, but when it comes to
walking the walk many people here seem willing to dump NPOV
in order to tweak someone. That is unacceptable behaviour.
Robert (RK)
=====
"No one is poor except he who lacks knowledge....A person who has knowledge has
everything. A person who lacks knowledge, what has he? Once a person acquires knowledge,
what does he lack? [Babylonian Talmud, Nedarim, 41a]
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway
http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/