Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

daredtowork

(3,732 posts)

31. Well you can cloak it in your media theory

Reply to mythology (Reply #27)

Sat Jan 31, 2015, 01:08 AM

Jan 2015

But women who have actually edited Wikipedia know the truth.

The problem is that the boys who were gaming at the bottom rose to do the "arbitration" at the top. I'm sure it all looks perfectly neutral to them when they freeze the edit war after the GamerGate side has established their "vision of the article".

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

36 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Wikipedia Declares War On Women, Gives Anti-Feminist Males Control Over Gender And Sexuality Entries [View all] KamaAina Jan 2015 OP

i stopped using wiki a couple years ago, seeing definitions change to mra voice, with feminist seabeyond Jan 2015 #1

Here's the current Wikipedia summary of Gamergate. Nye Bevan Jan 2015 #18

Answering that question would require an admission that this OP is BS. Bonobo Jan 2015 #22

I'm genuinely curious. NaturalHigh Feb 2015 #36

Just like the GOP Congress. nt geek tragedy Jan 2015 #2

That blows straight past "bad optics" and directly into the realm of ... 11 Bravo Jan 2015 #3

Fuck GamerGate. NuclearDem Jan 2015 #4

Seriously. KamaAina Jan 2015 #5

^^^ Hong Kong Cavalier Jan 2015 #19

Indeed, fuck Gamer Gate. But Wikipedia is blameless here as far as I can see. Bonobo Jan 2015 #23

I am vehemently opposed to the GamerGate anti-feminists. Maedhros Jan 2015 #6

Unless Wikipedias ToS prohibits women from editing articles... Lancero Jan 2015 #12

I'm sure that Wikipedia has guidelines for banning bad actors. Maedhros Jan 2015 #13

With how broadly they ruled, it's pretty much what happened. Lancero Jan 2015 #15

It looks like this is the Wikipedia rule relevant to this situation: Maedhros Jan 2015 #20

Wikipedia has long used Pseudo-Neutrality and Obscure-rule Mongering daredtowork Jan 2015 #26

I have no feelings for Wikipedia one way or another. Maedhros Jan 2015 #33

It is hard to tell from the Guardian article daredtowork Jan 2015 #34

Agreed - Wikipedia is fundamentally flawed. [n/t] Maedhros Feb 2015 #35

They were censored because of the excessive number of edits they had made to the site. Maedhros Jan 2015 #32

It's the first step of a multi-step byzantine process; nobody is as of yet banned Recursion Jan 2015 #25

On the surface, that sounds like bull shit joeglow3 Jan 2015 #7

Now there's a wonderfully biased and non-loaded article... Donald Ian Rankin Jan 2015 #8

Here's another Lancero Jan 2015 #14

One thing this article skates over daredtowork Jan 2015 #28

I know next to nothing about this controversy Waiting For Everyman Jan 2015 #9

I never use Wiki for anything but the most surface definitions. Starry Messenger Jan 2015 #10

Dealing with the credit card company is a pain... Lancero Jan 2015 #11

Seems to be a misunderstanding of how wikipedia works. Jesus Malverde Jan 2015 #16

It's not a misunderstanding mythology Jan 2015 #27

Well you can cloak it in your media theory daredtowork Jan 2015 #31

anyone who thinks Wikipedia is gender unbiased blackcrow Jan 2015 #17

Do you have examples? joeglow3 Jan 2015 #21

I haven't regularly edited wikipedia since around 2007 daredtowork Jan 2015 #29

I've been following a Wikipedia editors site after hearing about this... Lancero Jan 2015 #24

Sue these people shenmue Jan 2015 #30