[Foundation-l] The 'Undue Weight' of Truth on Wikipedia (from the Chronicle) + some citation discussions

[Jussi-Ville Heiskanen]

On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at fairpoint.net> wrote:
>> The key problem here is that WP:UNDUE was expressly written to address
>> the problem of genuine ongoing controversies, and fringe views. In
>> this case there is no ongoing controversy, but the use of the policy
>> has for long been used to remove new research no-one has even refuted,
>> much less there being an intractable controversy over the issue.
>>
>> It is equally clear that some portions of the policy have been
>> wilfully wordsmithed so  it could be used outside the original intent.
>> There is plenty of meticulously sourced new information that has been
>> challenged and removed from wikipedia because of this. It is only now
>> that this subverted use of the policy runs headlong into this kind of
>> glaringly obvious example of it's misuse that people are taking
>> notice. And taking notice of it in the wrong way.
>>
>> Correcting the act, but not the root cause. In fact, if I wanted to
>> retain the ability to use the policy in precisely this manner, I would
>> be very quick about making sure the issue were quickly settled, so
>> there never arose a genuine review of the policy and its uses. The
>> fact that the policy is used in this fashion daily if not hourly.
>> Those (ab)uses just haven't been as glaringly obvious. I suspect we
>> all know that deep within our hearts, but loathe to go through the
>> tedium of overhauling a policy page with such deep devotees.
>>
>>
>> --
>> --
>> Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]
>
> Actually, there is an ongoing controversy, the whitewashing of radical
> history which is what the language, paraphrasing, "no evidence was
> presented but the defendants were found guilty", is all about.
>
> The policy, misused in the course of POV struggle, is a way of excluding
> information with interferes with presentation of a desired point of view.

I think you are being way too generous. The misuse of the policy is far wider
than mere POV issues. The issue is that the policy as currently employed and
systematically construed, is not fit to use. It is not enabling us to
work together
on issues that are controversial in the world outside wikipedia. It is
exacerbating
problems within the Wikipedia editorship. Let me repeat in more concise form.
The policy was written to enable serious work on hard topics, it as it
stands, hinders work, making it hard to edit simple facts.

-- 
--
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]