Register - Login
Views: 99855634
Main - Memberlist - Active users - Calendar - Wiki - IRC Chat - Online users
Ranks - Rules/FAQ - Stats - Latest Posts - Color Chart - Smilies
05-04-22 11:48:29 AM
Jul - News - Wikipedia bans Church of Scientology New poll - New thread - New reply
Next newer thread | Next older thread
Hiryuu

Level: 207


Posts: 10196/14435
EXP: 127636162
For next: 2147992

Since: 07-06-07


Since last post: 11.8 years
Last activity: 11.7 years

Posted on 05-29-09 01:43:56 PM Link | Quote
Well that's a new one...

Seems Wikipedia isn't so free to edit as of late.

____________________
Ninji

Birdo
Why did my user title say I'm a toaster anyway
Level: 88


Posts: 269/2014
EXP: 6639311
For next: 11353

Since: 07-26-07

Pronouns: he/him or they/them
From: Glasgow, Scotland

Since last post: 114 days
Last activity: 7 days

Posted on 05-29-09 01:51:28 PM Link | Quote


I remember several years ago I read some articles that detailed just what went into Scientology and how stupid it was. Therefore, anything against them automatically gets an from me. Especially if they're doing something like this to make themselves look better when they're really not.

____________________
Jeez, not having an eye-burning blue layout is gonna take some getting used to... · Hacking Tools: NSMB Editor 4 · Nitro Explorer · NARC Explorer
Hiryuu

Level: 207


Posts: 10198/14435
EXP: 127636162
For next: 2147992

Since: 07-06-07


Since last post: 11.8 years
Last activity: 11.7 years

Posted on 05-29-09 01:53:33 PM Link | Quote
Well, a lot of places tend to use Wikipedia to advance their own agendas with their own devices, so the practice itself is nothing new...

...but for Wikipedia to actually come out and ban one of the higher up organizations that actually does this shows that there is a bit of an opinion in an otherwise neutral organization.

Obviously, they know where the bullshit lies.

____________________
Q
風のノータム
Level: 105


Posts: 757/2986
EXP: 11977471
For next: 284789

Since: 08-03-07

Pronouns: she/her
From: Nowhere

Since last post: 51 days
Last activity: 1 day

Posted on 05-29-09 02:03:24 PM Link | Quote
While I wouldn't totally approve of everything done against them, this seems like a necessary step when it comes to dealing with a group so fond of Internet censorship.
In fact, I'm somewhat surprised that it wasn't done a long time ago.
Ninji

Birdo
Why did my user title say I'm a toaster anyway
Level: 88


Posts: 272/2014
EXP: 6639311
For next: 11353

Since: 07-26-07

Pronouns: he/him or they/them
From: Glasgow, Scotland

Since last post: 114 days
Last activity: 7 days

Posted on 05-29-09 07:11:22 PM Link | Quote
Besides, they're not forcing Scientology completely off Wikipedia. They're blocking the organisation from writing about itself - but other people can still write about it. I think that's a pretty fair compromise.

____________________
Jeez, not having an eye-burning blue layout is gonna take some getting used to... · Hacking Tools: NSMB Editor 4 · Nitro Explorer · NARC Explorer
Lyskar
12210
-The Chaos within trumps the Chaos without-
Level: 192


Posts: 2708/12211
EXP: 99332106
For next: 541465

Since: 07-03-07

From: 52-2-88-7

Since last post: 7.4 years
Last activity: 7.3 years

Posted on 05-29-09 07:19:00 PM Link | Quote

Time/Date

&date&

Posts

&numposts&

Days Here

&numdays&

Level

&level&
Metal_Man88
Local Moderator
It's one of the few sensible things Wikipedia has done. Normally they move towards protecting meaningless articles on entertainment/fantasy things, ignoring real life ones, then deleting articles on entertainment/fantasy things the admins don't personally like.

____________________
Jeez, not being Spontaneous Madness is gonna take some getting used to...
Original Layout © Tobias Kelmandia
Kles

Level: 87


Posts: 1414/1947
EXP: 6312612
For next: 80162

Since: 07-23-07


Since last post: 79 days
Last activity: 23 min.

Posted on 05-30-09 05:03:43 AM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Treeki
Besides, they're not forcing Scientology completely off Wikipedia. They're blocking the organisation from writing about itself - but other people can still write about it. I think that's a pretty fair compromise.


Hasn't it always been considered a conflict of interest to edit articles regarding yourself or your organization? How is this any different?
Ninji

Birdo
Why did my user title say I'm a toaster anyway
Level: 88


Posts: 275/2014
EXP: 6639311
For next: 11353

Since: 07-26-07

Pronouns: he/him or they/them
From: Glasgow, Scotland

Since last post: 114 days
Last activity: 7 days

Posted on 05-30-09 11:01:35 AM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Kles
Originally posted by Treeki
Besides, they're not forcing Scientology completely off Wikipedia. They're blocking the organisation from writing about itself - but other people can still write about it. I think that's a pretty fair compromise.


Hasn't it always been considered a conflict of interest to edit articles regarding yourself or your organization? How is this any different?

Yeah, but if I've got this right, this is the first time they've banned an entire organisation from editing, just because of this. That's why it's so newsworthy.

____________________
Jeez, not having an eye-burning blue layout is gonna take some getting used to... · Hacking Tools: NSMB Editor 4 · Nitro Explorer · NARC Explorer
Next newer thread | Next older thread
Jul - News - Wikipedia bans Church of Scientology New poll - New thread - New reply


Rusted Logic

Acmlmboard - commit 47be4dc [2021-08-23]
©2000-2022 Acmlm, Xkeeper, Kaito Sinclaire, et al.

28 database queries, 2 query cache hits.
Query execution time: 0.078661 seconds
Script execution time: 0.021412 seconds
Total render time: 0.100073 seconds