Getting Down To It

| | Comments (0)

Wikipedia strives to build a consensus and explains that it is not a democracy and the governance can be inconsistent. Sounds like the USA government.

The policies and guidelines clearly explain that a user who acts against the spirit of our written policies may be reprimanded, even if technically no rule has been violated.

Contributors come from many different countries and cultures and have different views, we must treat others with respect to effectively build an encyclopedia. Articles contributed should be neutral and represent views fairly, proportionately and without bias. it seems as if contributors decide to overlook this policy and believe slandering people through Wikipedia is okay. Well, it's not.

I don't like how they state that you don't need to read any Wikipedia policies before contributing. i think that all users should click on an agreement before having the chance to better the encyclopedia.

In the five pillars, they explain that Wikipedia is not the place to insert personal opinions, experiences, or arguments. This is because Wikipedia has a neutral point of view in which they strive for articles that advocate no single point of view. Even though anyone can edit, anything you write can we edited and redistributed by the community.

They shouldn't even have a code of conduct because it seems that no one reads and abides by it. They state that they have no firm rules besides the pillars, but whatever you write will be preserved for posterity and to be bold with edits and contributions to the articles.

I think the Wiki creators need to rethink their policies and pillars.


Leave a comment

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by West Coast Envy published on November 7, 2008 2:54 PM.

Where does the blame go? was the previous entry in this blog.

Wikipedia Articles is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Powered by Movable Type 4.13