HomeCounter-Racism Radio NetworkCounter-Racism Television NetworkArticlesProjectsCounter-Racism Work/Study ProjectShopping MallContact
Secure DonationsSecure Donations  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  MemberlistMemberlist  RegisterRegister  ProfileProfile  Log inLog in

Wikipedia Does Not Try to Tell the Truth

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Counter-Racism Work/Study Project Forum Index -> Following THE LOGIC
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
HelixHair



Joined: 30 Apr 2003
Posts: 383
Location: Everywhere that is nowhere

PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 1:08 am    Post subject: Wikipedia Does Not Try to Tell the Truth Reply with quote

I found this very amusing dialogue on a Wikipedia forum. I have embedded in dark red font the questions that were raised in my mind. If I get the time, I will find out how to raise ask them directly to Wikipedia officials.

You're running up against one of the things about Wikipedia that surprises (and disappoints!) many people: Wikipedia does not try to tell the truth, it only tries to report what verifiable, authoritative sources say, in a neutral way , avoiding "original research". For more details, see The Five Pillars of Wikipedia.

In particular, that means we basically need links to articles about Counter-Racism Science in well-known newspapers and/or news magazines. (By the way, do you mean the people at "http://www.counter-racism.com/"?)

(Who at Wikipedia determines whether a newspaper is "well-known?")


If you want to reply to this message, just edit this page and I'll see it next time I check my "watchlist". Cheers, CWC(talk) 07:02, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Edward Williams Writes: What person is an "authoritative source"?

Basically, someone whose work is reliable because it gets checked carefully by other people, or at least is supposed to get checked. For example:

* Journalists at major newspapers which have fact-checkers.
* Scientists in published papers and books about their area of expertise.

Also, a person counts as a reliable primary source about themselves for some statements ("I can't swim") but not others ("I did not steal that money").
As it happens, some of the senior people at Wikipedia are trying to combine our existing rules about what we can put in our articles into a new policy, Wikipedia:Attribution. Unfortunately, that means all the documents are being edited several times a day just now, which makes it hard to learn this stuff!
Probably the best way to start is to read Wikipedia:Attribution/FAQ, then Wikipedia:Attribution

BTW, the standard way to "sign" messages around here is to type "~~~~" at the end of the message. The software will turn it into your signature (usually your username, but you can change that in "my preferences") followed by the date or time. That's how I'll sign this message: CWC 16:24, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

How many "authoritative sources" are there for replacing the SYSTEM of racism (white supremacy) with a SYSTEM of juctice? Edward Williams 15:32, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't understand that question. Remember that Wikipedia is about documented and describing the way things are, not the way things should be.
Wikipedia is probably not the right place to work directly against racism or for justice. What Wikipedia can do is fairly, accurately (Huh? Is "accurate" the same as "truthful?" If so, didn't this person just say that Wikipedia does not try to tell the truth?)and dispassionately report what various White Supremacists believe (Who at Wikipedia determines what persons are White Supremacists and how do these Wikipedia officials make these determinations?), or at least preach, and the things they've said and done ... which turns out to be a really good way to discredit them. But some of the racists edit Wikipedia as well, and the rules here require us to be polite to them. If that's not the sort of thing you like doing, perhaps you should look for another website or group to work with? (In addition to Wikipedia, of course.) Cheers, CWC 17:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Chris, I'll rephrase the question. What person is an "authoritative source" on material on replacing the SYSTEM of racism (white supremacy) with a SYSTEM of juctice? Edward Williams 10:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. I'd look for a prominent university professor, politician, activist or writer.Who at Wikipedia determines who is or is not prominent?
Also, you might want to take a look at our articles in Category:Anti-racism and Category:African Americans' rights organizations. Some of the organizations described in those articles might be able to help you. Cheers, CWC 21:09, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Chris, does that mean you don't know any person that is an "authoritative source" on material on replacing the SYSTEM of racism (white supremacy) with a SYSTEM of juctice? Edward Williams 11:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

No, I don't. Sorry.
An aside: you might enjoy reading Deacons for Defense and Justice, especially the bit about undergarments I just added. Cheers, CWC 01:27, 7 April 2007 (UTC) "Tacky/Trashy"
_________________
Death of the lower body is certain. Now what?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
Edward Williams
Site Admin


Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 3079
Location: I am from everywhere I've ever been and everywhere I've never been

PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 7:19 am    Post subject: Re: Wikipedia Does Not Try to Tell the Truth Reply with quote

HelixHair wrote:
I found this very amusing dialogue on a Wikipedia forum. I have embedded in dark red font the questions that were raised in my mind. If I get the time, I will find out how to raise ask them directly to Wikipedia officials.

You're running up against one of the things about Wikipedia that surprises (and disappoints!) many people: Wikipedia does not try to tell the truth, it only tries to report what verifiable, authoritative sources say, in a neutral way , avoiding \"original research\". For more details, see The Five Pillars of Wikipedia.

In particular, that means we basically need links to articles about Counter-Racism Science in well-known newspapers and/or news magazines. (By the way, do you mean the people at \"http://www.counter-racism.com/\"?)

(Who at Wikipedia determines whether a newspaper is \"well-known?\")


If you want to reply to this message, just edit this page and I'll see it next time I check my \"watchlist\". Cheers, CWC(talk) 07:02, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Edward Williams Writes: What person is an \"authoritative source\"?

Basically, someone whose work is reliable because it gets checked carefully by other people, or at least is supposed to get checked. For example:

* Journalists at major newspapers which have fact-checkers.
* Scientists in published papers and books about their area of expertise.

Also, a person counts as a reliable primary source about themselves for some statements (\"I can't swim\") but not others (\"I did not steal that money\").
As it happens, some of the senior people at Wikipedia are trying to combine our existing rules about what we can put in our articles into a new policy, Wikipedia:Attribution. Unfortunately, that means all the documents are being edited several times a day just now, which makes it hard to learn this stuff!
Probably the best way to start is to read Wikipedia:Attribution/FAQ, then Wikipedia:Attribution

BTW, the standard way to \"sign\" messages around here is to type \"~~~~\" at the end of the message. The software will turn it into your signature (usually your username, but you can change that in \"my preferences\") followed by the date or time. That's how I'll sign this message: CWC 16:24, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

How many \"authoritative sources\" are there for replacing the SYSTEM of racism (white supremacy) with a SYSTEM of juctice? Edward Williams 15:32, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't understand that question. Remember that Wikipedia is about documented and describing the way things are, not the way things should be.
Wikipedia is probably not the right place to work directly against racism or for justice. What Wikipedia can do is fairly, accurately (Huh? Is \"accurate\" the same as \"truthful?\" If so, didn't this person just say that Wikipedia does not try to tell the truth?)and dispassionately report what various White Supremacists believe (Who at Wikipedia determines what persons are White Supremacists and how do these Wikipedia officials make these determinations?), or at least preach, and the things they've said and done ... which turns out to be a really good way to discredit them. But some of the racists edit Wikipedia as well, and the rules here require us to be polite to them. If that's not the sort of thing you like doing, perhaps you should look for another website or group to work with? (In addition to Wikipedia, of course.) Cheers, CWC 17:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Chris, I'll rephrase the question. What person is an \"authoritative source\" on material on replacing the SYSTEM of racism (white supremacy) with a SYSTEM of juctice? Edward Williams 10:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. I'd look for a prominent university professor, politician, activist or writer.Who at Wikipedia determines who is or is not prominent?
Also, you might want to take a look at our articles in Category:Anti-racism and Category:African Americans' rights organizations. Some of the organizations described in those articles might be able to help you. Cheers, CWC 21:09, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Chris, does that mean you don't know any person that is an \"authoritative source\" on material on replacing the SYSTEM of racism (white supremacy) with a SYSTEM of juctice? Edward Williams 11:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

No, I don't. Sorry.
An aside: you might enjoy reading Deacons for Defense and Justice, especially the bit about undergarments I just added. Cheers, CWC 01:27, 7 April 2007 (UTC) \"Tacky/Trashy\"

Hello HelixHair,

Are you asking a question about counter-racism logic or are you answering a question about counter-racism logic?
_________________
What is the reason YOU were born into a SYSTEM of INJUSTICE if not to replace it with a SYSTEM of JUSTICE?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
HelixHair



Joined: 30 Apr 2003
Posts: 383
Location: Everywhere that is nowhere

PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:33 am    Post subject: Re: Wikipedia Does Not Try to Tell the Truth Reply with quote

Edward Williams wrote:
HelixHair wrote:
I found this very amusing dialogue on a Wikipedia forum. I have embedded in dark red font the questions that were raised in my mind. If I get the time, I will find out how to raise ask them directly to Wikipedia officials.

You're running up against one of the things about Wikipedia that surprises (and disappoints!) many people: Wikipedia does not try to tell the truth, it only tries to report what verifiable, authoritative sources say, in a neutral way , avoiding \\\"original research\\\". For more details, see The Five Pillars of Wikipedia.

In particular, that means we basically need links to articles about Counter-Racism Science in well-known newspapers and/or news magazines. (By the way, do you mean the people at \\\"http://www.counter-racism.com/\\\"?)

(Who at Wikipedia determines whether a newspaper is \\\"well-known?\\\")


If you want to reply to this message, just edit this page and I'll see it next time I check my \\\"watchlist\\\". Cheers, CWC(talk) 07:02, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Edward Williams Writes: What person is an \\\"authoritative source\\\"?

Basically, someone whose work is reliable because it gets checked carefully by other people, or at least is supposed to get checked. For example:

* Journalists at major newspapers which have fact-checkers.
* Scientists in published papers and books about their area of expertise.

Also, a person counts as a reliable primary source about themselves for some statements (\\\"I can't swim\\\") but not others (\\\"I did not steal that money\\\").
As it happens, some of the senior people at Wikipedia are trying to combine our existing rules about what we can put in our articles into a new policy, Wikipedia:Attribution. Unfortunately, that means all the documents are being edited several times a day just now, which makes it hard to learn this stuff!
Probably the best way to start is to read Wikipedia:Attribution/FAQ, then Wikipedia:Attribution

BTW, the standard way to \\\"sign\\\" messages around here is to type \\\"~~~~\\\" at the end of the message. The software will turn it into your signature (usually your username, but you can change that in \\\"my preferences\\\") followed by the date or time. That's how I'll sign this message: CWC 16:24, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

How many \\\"authoritative sources\\\" are there for replacing the SYSTEM of racism (white supremacy) with a SYSTEM of juctice? Edward Williams 15:32, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't understand that question. Remember that Wikipedia is about documented and describing the way things are, not the way things should be.
Wikipedia is probably not the right place to work directly against racism or for justice. What Wikipedia can do is fairly, accurately (Huh? Is \\\"accurate\\\" the same as \\\"truthful?\\\" If so, didn't this person just say that Wikipedia does not try to tell the truth?)and dispassionately report what various White Supremacists believe (Who at Wikipedia determines what persons are White Supremacists and how do these Wikipedia officials make these determinations?), or at least preach, and the things they've said and done ... which turns out to be a really good way to discredit them. But some of the racists edit Wikipedia as well, and the rules here require us to be polite to them. If that's not the sort of thing you like doing, perhaps you should look for another website or group to work with? (In addition to Wikipedia, of course.) Cheers, CWC 17:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Chris, I'll rephrase the question. What person is an \\\"authoritative source\\\" on material on replacing the SYSTEM of racism (white supremacy) with a SYSTEM of juctice? Edward Williams 10:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. I'd look for a prominent university professor, politician, activist or writer.Who at Wikipedia determines who is or is not prominent?
Also, you might want to take a look at our articles in Category:Anti-racism and Category:African Americans' rights organizations. Some of the organizations described in those articles might be able to help you. Cheers, CWC 21:09, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Chris, does that mean you don't know any person that is an \\\"authoritative source\\\" on material on replacing the SYSTEM of racism (white supremacy) with a SYSTEM of juctice? Edward Williams 11:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

No, I don't. Sorry.
An aside: you might enjoy reading Deacons for Defense and Justice, especially the bit about undergarments I just added. Cheers, CWC 01:27, 7 April 2007 (UTC) \\\"Tacky/Trashy\\\"

Hello HelixHair,

Are you asking a question about counter-racism logic or are you answering a question about counter-racism logic?


I am asking the questions in red font.

If you can answer them in time. Edward Williams, that would be appreciated. Either way, I hope to pose them to one or more Wikipedia officials. IF the latter responds, I will post the reply here.
_________________
Death of the lower body is certain. Now what?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
Edward Williams
Site Admin


Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 3079
Location: I am from everywhere I've ever been and everywhere I've never been

PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you for your response. If you have questions that you intend to use in the process of producing and/or running a counter-racism science experiment you should post a counter-racism science experiment. If you decide to post a counter-racism science experiment and run it, please also post the data you receive as a result of running your counter-racism science experiment.

Thank you.
_________________
What is the reason YOU were born into a SYSTEM of INJUSTICE if not to replace it with a SYSTEM of JUSTICE?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Counter-Racism Work/Study Project Forum Index -> Following THE LOGIC All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Web CalendarShopping MallDonations