Re: Wikipedia and me


jcon wrote:
jstevh@xxxxxxx wrote:
Maybe to shift somewhat to somewhat lighter subjects I think it
interesting to discuss my experiences with the Wikipedia and some of
math people's attempts at slanting that encyclopedia with their own
rather hostile antics.

First off, like most I came upon the Wikipedia as a useful resource,
where often it's true you need to check things in other sources, but
I've found that usually the Wikipedia is right, and you get more
information that is useful.

But one day while doing the routine searches that I HAVE to do as I
monitor the math wars, I found a search result showing up on the
Wikipedia to me!!!

Some nincompoop had put me on the Wikipedia as a sci.math crank.

I thought about it a bit, and decided to edit the article to make it
more accurate, clearing up some factual errors, like how long I'd
posted, and removing more libelous and hostile remarks.

Someone came back, reverted my edits.

I changed again, correcting the article.

My edits were reverted again, and remember, the math community is
HOSTILE, so we're talking about me finding some person had decided to
put up some nasty negative about me on the Wikipedia--trying to set
hostile opinions more firmly--and I was now in a fight against someone
trying to block me from making it into an objective encyclopedia
article--versus a rant against one individual.

Tiring of the stupidity, I put the page up for permanent deletion.

And it was so deleted, after a vote, and that was that.

The winning argument I gathered was that having a history of making
wrong claims on newsgroups did not justify getting into the
Wikipedia!!!


Translation: being a newsgroup crank is your ONLY claim to fame,
and it's not sufficient. Maybe you should take a lesson
from Barbara Schwarz, who's taken here craziness to multiple
venues and managed to retain her Wikipedia article.

Craziness? You call a gang, who hates my religion and wants me defamed
on Wikipiggi my craziness? I sure hope you are no "scientist", Bias and
stupidity not flattering for a guys who wants to be a scientist.

--
Barbara Schwarz (Looking for the original Mark [Marty] Rathbun. No
impostor, please!)
http://www.thunderstar.net/~schwarz/lrh/fbidocs.html
--
(I am concerned about Dave Touretzky's activities.)
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/

Read the pages on terrorist-friendly Andreas Heldal-Lund (arrested for
harassment):
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/lund/Lund04.html

Wikipedia defamation scribbler and pro eugenics Tilman Joerg Hausherr,
linked to the fanatical German secret service OPC, enemy of the USA
wants to hurt American tourism.
http://www.parishioners.org/extremists/hauser1.html
http://www.alarmgermany.org/tilman.htm
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.scientology/msg/8962a9830812112f?hl=en&;

Wikipedia defames and denies constitutional rights. The anti-free
speech leadership of Wikipedia banned me from correcting lies and
defamation around their article on me! Wikipedia is a destructive cult.






Oh well, all I cared about was preventing math people in the continual
fight of the math wars from getting that big of a leg-up by having a
hostile article against me in the Wikipedia, and remember, there are a
lot of them so it just wan't worth it to fight against a bunch of nasty
people by continually trying to edit the article to make it objective.

There may have been other paths to blocking them, but I like the one I
took.

Still that wasn't all with me and the Wikipedia as I've talked about
writing the first prime counting function article--which happened after
what I mentioned above--but there is more.


The nice thing about Wikipedia is that you can actually go back
and see how things played out.

In October 2004, you made an "article" about prime counting
algorithms that contained nothing but your silly formula
with no supporting information or background of any kind:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prime_counting_function&oldid=6912563
Let me put it this way: do *you* think that qualified
as a proper article on the subject?

Anyway, it went unnoticed until December, 2005, when
one of the knowledgeable math editors commented on the
strange nature and poor quality. In spite of your claims of
conspiracy, he obviously had no idea who you were,
but said he liked the idea of such an article. By mid-2005,
the real math contributers had turned it into a very
decent article (with your nonsense removed of course).
It's remained quite good since, and you've been
reduced to whining in the discussion page as usual.

In the end, this whole incident points to the amazing power of
Wikipedia
to contain the actions of individual nutcases and wind up with
something of actual value. I walk away impressed.

My question is why are you crying about this now? Slow day?

As they say, "They laughed an Einstein...but they also laughed
at Bozo". One of these days, you're going to understand that
it takes more than "Everybody's mean to me" to win an
argument in math or science.

-jc

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Wikipedia and me
    ... math people's attempts at slanting that encyclopedia with their own ... First off, like most I came upon the Wikipedia as a useful resource, ... and removing more libelous and hostile remarks. ... people by continually trying to edit the article to make it objective. ...
    (sci.skeptic)
  • Wikipedia and me
    ... math people's attempts at slanting that encyclopedia with their own ... First off, like most I came upon the Wikipedia as a useful resource, ... monitor the math wars, I found a search result showing up on the ... Someone came back, reverted my edits. ...
    (sci.skeptic)
  • Re: Wikipedia and me
    ... math people's attempts at slanting that encyclopedia with their own ... First off, like most I came upon the Wikipedia as a useful resource, ... and removing more libelous and hostile remarks. ... Someone came back, reverted my edits. ...
    (sci.skeptic)
  • Re: Wikipedia and me
    ... math people's attempts at slanting that encyclopedia with their own ... First off, like most I came upon the Wikipedia as a useful resource, ... and removing more libelous and hostile remarks. ... people by continually trying to edit the article to make it objective. ...
    (sci.skeptic)
  • Re: Wikipedia and me
    ... math people's attempts at slanting that encyclopedia with their own ... First off, like most I came upon the Wikipedia as a useful resource, ... and removing more libelous and hostile remarks. ... Someone came back, reverted my edits. ...
    (sci.skeptic)