Is Wikipedia Neutral?

[Enigma]

I have to say, I do love the very concept of Wikipedia and find it to be a wonderful resource for casual researchers. That being said, instances outlined in the article linked above shows what I see to be a terrible bias which will ultimately undermine Wiki's credibility as a source of unfettered knowledge.

Any thoughts?

Well, at the end of the day it relies heavily on the users to both submit neutral information, and editors to make sure it is so. Wether or not a specific entry is neutral is relevant to the day you look at it, as it's always open to update.

Given the example you post here, I think the items in question have been pretty much debunked. You could perhaps include a passage that states that these things did garnish some absurd amount of attention from our so called liberal media, but I think you'd find that if the President's wiki page included entries that he is good friends with terrorists (debunked) that he is not an American citizen (debunked) you would find an article that would garnish unwanted attention for being bias the other way! I suppose it's all a matter of perspective.

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by Enigma

Well, at the end of the day it relies heavily on the users to both submit neutral information, and editors to make sure it is so. Wether or not a specific entry is neutral is relevant to the day you look at it, as it's always open to update.

Given the example you post here, I think the items in question have been pretty much debunked. You could perhaps include a passage that states that these things did garnish some absurd amount of attention from our so called liberal media, but I think you'd find that if the President's wiki page included entries that he is good friends with terrorists (debunked) that he is not an American citizen (debunked) you would find an article that would garnish unwanted attention for being bias the other way! I suppose it's all a matter of perspective.

I agree that the Birth Certificate issue was a non-starter for some extremists. The part I disagree with is that Obama's relationship with William Ayers and "Reverend" Wright has not been debunked. What those relationships mean is up for the reader to conclude. But to not allow the inclusion of the FACTS surrounding his relationship with those high-profile, controversial individuals is evidence of bias, I believe.

[Enigma]

So much conspiracy abound, they got their on Wiki page it seems...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_...iracy_theories

[Enigma]

I agree that the Birth Certificate issue was a non-starter for some extremists. The part I disagree with is that Obama's relationship with William Ayers and "Reverend" Wright has not been debunked. What those relationships mean is up for the reader to conclude. But to not allow the inclusion of the FACTS surrounding his relationship with those high-profile, controversial individuals is evidence of bias, I believe.

There's certainly an argument to be made there. However, I'd suggest that listing every person that is linked in any simple way to another that is deemed unsavory would have the Wiki page of every politician be a list of of unchecked facts and meaningless, irrelevant information. For example, without reading the entire thing, I wouldn't imagine George W. Bush's wiki page mentions anything about his families business connection with the Bin Laden family, although this was alleged and reported on, as well.

[Zachstar]

Guess who picked up on the story faster than you can say "I WANT him to fail!"

Fox News!

[Freiwillige]

I would still like to see proof of his American birth. This is America and if somethings questionable, it should be put out in the open! Only people who have something to hide will take the time to block any fact finding into the truth. My 2 cents.

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by Enigma

There's certainly an argument to be made there. However, I'd suggest that listing every person that is linked in any simple way to another that is deemed unsavory would have the Wiki page of every politician be a list of of unchecked facts and meaningless, irrelevant information. For example, without reading the entire thing, I wouldn't imagine George W. Bush's wiki page mentions anything about his families business connection with the Bin Laden family, although this was alleged and reported on, as well.

True enough. However, the difference is that Obama himself had connections with these figures, and these connections aren't merely alleged.

Like I said, I agree with the Birth Certificate issue not being mentioned on a biographical page of Obama. But his admitted connections to such players as Ayers and Wright do seem relevant.

[Enigma]

True enough. However, the difference is that Obama himself had connections with these figures, and these connections aren't merely alleged.

Well, same with Bush.


Bush attended an investment meeting on Sept 10th, 2001 with Shafiq bin Laden, for the Carlyle and Binladin groups. It's public knowledge that in the the following October, the Bush family and the Bin Laden family severed business ties, for obvious reasons.

Keep in mind, I don't care. I don't think it should be on Bush's wiki page. I don't think it's a dark and deceptive thing. But I feel the same way about Obama's page.

[Enigma]

Heh, who do you think would be the FIRST person to push the issue if there really was one?

I'm betting Joe Biden.

Limbaugh, Coulter, Subman, Steamwake....

[XabbaRus]

Wikipedia is great for reference as a starting point. For WWII battles etc where there is a lot of factual reference material to back it up it is good too.

It is when you get into personalities and organisations that it gets dodgy.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Enigma

Limbaugh, Coulter, Subman, Steamwake....

Me.

If there was one.

I find it interesting that the thread starts with the idea of questioning Wiki for cleaning up the Obama page, but indeed they do give this argument its own page.

@ Freiwillige: Your post is the most informative of the proponent side of this discussion. I'm still interested to see where this goes.

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by Enigma

Well, same with Bush.


Bush attended an investment meeting on Sept 10th, 2001 with Shafiq bin Laden, for the Carlyle and Binladin groups. It's public knowledge that in the the following October, the Bush family and the Bin Laden family severed business ties, for obvious reasons.

Keep in mind, I don't care. I don't think it should be on Bush's wiki page. I don't think it's a dark and deceptive thing. But I feel the same way about Obama's page.

See, here's where I think we differ. In the instance you're bringing up, an investment meeting doesn't seem "biographical" to me. In a recount of the presidency, sure - but not in a biographical paper of the president.

Whereas I think ties to Ayers and Wright seem more centralized around the person himself, rather than the event.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by Aramike

True enough. However, the difference is that Obama himself had connections with these figures, and these connections aren't merely alleged.

Like I said, I agree with the Birth Certificate issue not being mentioned on a biographical page of Obama. But his admitted connections to such players as Ayers and Wright do seem relevant.

Wright is on obama's Wiki, and you find Obama on Professor Ayers Wiki.

Obama-Ayers Controversy

Main article: Bill Ayers presidential election controversy
During the 2008 U.S. presidential campaign, a controversy arose regarding Ayers' contacts with then-candidate Barack Obama, a matter that had been public knowledge in Chicago for years.[51] After being raised by the British press[52][51][53] the connection was picked up by blogs and newspapers in the United States. The matter was raised in a campaign debate by moderator George Stephanopoulos, and later became an issue for the John McCain presidential campaign. Investigations by The New York Times, CNN, and other news organizations concluded that Obama does not have a close relationship with Ayers.[54][55][56] In an op-ed piece after the election, Ayers denied any close association with Obama, and castigated the Republican campaign for its use of guilt by association tactics.[35] In a new edition of his memoirs, Fugitive Days: Memoirs of an Anti-War-Activist, he added a new afterword describing their relationship as "neighbors and family friends".[57] But in an interview with Good Morning America, Ayers said the afterword was "describing there how the blogosphere characterized the relationship."[58]

[Enigma]

I would still like to see proof of his American birth. This is America and if somethings questionable, it should be put out in the open! Only people who have something to hide will take the time to block any fact finding into the truth. My 2 cents.

Don't you think if there was anything to this story we'd know it? Obama is only the most famous man in the world right now. You don't think the Republicans, or anyone for that matter, would have made sure the world knew it if any of it were true?

Oh, and proof of his American birth has been put out in the open. Google it. Your wishes will come true.

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by Enigma

Don't you think if there was anything to this story we'd know it? Obama is only the most famous man in the world right now. You don't think the Republicans, or anyone for that matter, would have made sure the world knew it if any of it were true?

Oh, and proof of his American birth has been put out in the open. Google it. Your wishes will come true.

Heh, who do you think would be the FIRST person to push the issue if there really was one?

I'm betting Joe Biden.