GA Russell Posted June 3, 2013 Report Posted June 3, 2013 Guess what! In the US it's religion and politics. http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2013/06/03/wikipedia-edit-wars-most-hotly-contested/?intcmp=trending Quote
erwbol Posted June 3, 2013 Report Posted June 3, 2013 While the most controversial Wikipedialike pages should be the not-so-holy books of religion themselves. Quote
Jazzmoose Posted June 4, 2013 Report Posted June 4, 2013 So you're proposing adding complete religious works to Wikipedia? I'm not sure that's what it's for... Quote
erwbol Posted June 4, 2013 Report Posted June 4, 2013 (edited) No I'm suggesting books like the bible were compiled, edited, added to, etc. by humans over long stretches of time and are full of unreliable bs and have the character of locked Wikipedia pages. (Not that I'm not accusing Wikipedia of being as full of shit as religious texts.) (I see this is the Miscellaneous Non-Political section so not really the place for my remarks.) Edited June 4, 2013 by erwbol Quote
Kevin Bresnahan Posted June 4, 2013 Report Posted June 4, 2013 Go read the controversy section/discussion on Steve Hoffman's page. The Wiki editor refuses to allow anyone to reference the Houston newspaper article that mentions that Hoffman was fired from MCA. It's pretty funny watching the edits go back & forth Quote
Scott Dolan Posted June 4, 2013 Report Posted June 4, 2013 Haha, I like how the very first thing you see on his page is "this article has issues". It should have said "this person has issues". Quote
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.