Wikipedia Declares War On Women, Gives Anti-Feminist Males Control Over Gender And Sexuality Entries

[daredtowork]

34. It is hard to tell from the Guardian article

There's also a note at the bottom saying the article has been edited. The original suggested the "feminists" were all banned and the Gamergaters left alone. The problem with Wikipedia, however, is general - it's not with that one article. And, IMHO, the same problem would develop in any context where there is crowd-sourcing (anarchy/gang-rule), a deep rule set (that can be "gamed&quot , and an underlying culture of science-rational-poseur-putdowning of the Other.

If that last point seems like I'm against science - I'm not. I'm against the tendency of men to be identified with science and to automatically gain the upper-hand and the authority of "neutrality" from that. The reason this is especially associated with Wikipedia is they used to have a "Not Neutral Point of View" tag that was used in edit wars to condemn anything that was critique/other, even if it was sourced. Whole articles could be slapped with NPOV at the top, and it was difficult to get this removed. Anything that is controversial will have this problem. The white male privileged pov will be scientific and authoritative - everyone elses will be "not neutral".

To give you some insight into the distortion of perspective we are talking about here - just a couple of months ago a disabled performance artist asked me to help him because his entry in Wikipedia was being questioned. He had a considerable body of work, media coverage, a play performed at the Kennedy Center, work in an online exhibit at the Smithsonian, and his papers archived at a world class university. He was an important voice in the independent living movement. I had to ARGUE for his notability. Several times. Do you think anyone has to argue for an entry on the latest cool anime? "Neutral" at Wikipedia is what the gangs who rule there think is "notable".