Wikipedia polishes the Obama Drama

Now when you read about Obama on Wikipedia all the drama, controversial connections, blemishes are gone, as in erased, as in no such record. Historical revisionism already…that was fast. Cleaned him up real good…absolutely shocking. So is this the tactic for his “volunteer soldiers” and the infamous “truth squad” this is alarming.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama

 

This is not revisionism, it is the nature of a contributory information source.

Wikipedia is not meant to be a scholarly research tool.

 

Of course it is not a scholarly research tool, I never said it was. It's an online community encyclopedia and it has been altered to poslish Obama's past.

Do you have anything to actually say about my topic other than just posting your usual Rogerite type posts?

 

It's not meant to have a political bias either. I think most of what you're talking about is unsubstantiated political rhetoric.

 

Actually it is substantiated information that has disappeared from Wikipedia. It was there and now it's gone, thus the topic of the thread.

 

I did post my thoughts, the implication was that this was some kind of revisionism, I contended that this is not any kind of revisionism, it is just what Wikipedia is. Revisionism is an attempt to rewrite history, this is nothing more than wikiism. If this had been 'Encylopedia Brittanica polishes the Obama Drama' there would have been plenty of room for discussion.

Okay, wiki acted like wiki. Why is that worthy of a discussion? What would have those who disagree with your contention say in response?

And, BTW, this is still there:

What further negativism would you like to see included in the article?

 

I've mentioned before that the most interesting part of Wikipedia is the discussion behind the article - I just started scanning the discussion area for this article and it looks once again to hold true. Lots of turmoil behind the scenes that must be resolved.

 

With as much as there is to write about Obama, his article has been split into many smaller articles. Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers are mentioned in the Barack Obama presidential primary campaign, 2008 subarticle.

 

Maybe Enoch should read what he is committing on before it causes him to look foolish! :laugh:

 

He doesn't look foolish. He actually looks scholarly because he knows what SHOULD be on there and isn't.