[Taxacom] Rubbish, lies and hate by academic fraud Wolfgang Wuster on Wikipedia!
Doug Yanega
dyanega at ucr.edu
Wed Oct 9 11:39:23 CDT 2013
On 10/9/13 2:54 AM, Raymond Hoser - The Snakeman wrote:
> By contrast we just had it from another correspondent here on taxacom that Wikipedia has no interest in factual accuracy whatsoever and that all they need is an IP address they can link to.
>
Here is the actual text of Wikipedia's official policy (from
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:TRUTH):
" Wikipedia's core sourcing policy, Wikipedia:Verifiability
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability>, used to define
the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia as "*verifiability, not
truth*". "Verifiability" was used in this context to mean that material
added to Wikipedia must have been published previously by a reliable
source <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SOURCES>. Editors may
not add their own views to articles simply because they believe them to
be correct, and may not remove sources' views from articles simply
because they disagree with them.
The phrase "the threshold for inclusion is verifiability, not truth"
meant that verifiability is a necessary condition (a minimum
requirement) for the inclusion of material, though it is not a
sufficient condition (it may not be enough). Sources must also be
appropriate, and must be used carefully, and must be balanced relative
to other sources per Wikipedia's policy on due and undue weight
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WEIGHT>.
Wikipedia's articles are intended as intelligent summaries and
reflections of current published debate within the relevant fields, an
overview of the relevant literature. The Verifiability policy is related
to another core content policy, Neutral point of view
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view>, which
holds that we include all significant views on a subject. Citing
reliable sources for any material challenged or likely to be challenged
gives readers the chance to check for themselves that the most
appropriate sources have been used, and used well (see below
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:TRUTH#.22If_it.27s_written_in_a_book.2C_it_must_be_true.21.22>).
That we have rules for the inclusion of material does not mean
Wikipedians have no respect for truth and accuracy, just as a court's
reliance on rules of evidence
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_of_evidence> does not mean the
court does not respect truth. Wikipedia values accuracy, but it
/requires/ verifiability. Unlike some encyclopedias, Wikipedia does not
try to impose "the truth" on its readers, and does not ask that they
trust something just because they read it in Wikipedia. We empower our
readers. We don't ask for their blind trust."
As someone who has personally made over 10,000 Wikipedia edits, and is
intimately familiar with WP policy and its enforcement, the Raymond
Hoser article there (which I had not read before today) is remarkably
objective, fulfilling WP's policies on NPOV (Neutral Point of View) and
Verifiability. There is not a single example of an ad hominem attack *by
an editor* - all negative comments are quotations from published and
cited sources, and the article even quotes Hoser's comments in his own
defense. As such, there is no legitimate point of contention here, so
far as Wikipedia policy is concerned. Mr. Hoser: It is ultimately
irrelevant whether you feel personally offended by the low opinion the
world has of you and your work; that low opinion is your own doing, not
the result of any conspiracies against you, AND it is a matter of public
record - a record that the WP article accurately reflects. If you don't
want that to be your legacy, then maybe you should reconsider how and
why you do things. Have you ever read "A Christmas Carol" by Dickens?
Sincerely,
--
Doug Yanega Dept. of Entomology Entomology Research Museum
Univ. of California, Riverside, CA 92521-0314 skype: dyanega
phone: (951) 827-4315 (disclaimer: opinions are mine, not UCR's)
http://cache.ucr.edu/~heraty/yanega.html
"There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness
is the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82
More information about the Taxacom
mailing list