Talk:Wikipedia
From Metapedia
Text moved from Talk:Main_Page
- I guess that was pretty much expected, the same thing happened at the Swedish Wikipedia a while ago. --Günther 21:33, 19 July 2007 (CEST)
- Marxism is ok on wikipedia, being pro-European is not. -- Doktor_Faustus 25 July 2007
- I tried to add heavy metal band Battlecry to wikipedia, I had already added many minor metal bands (some among which even totally unknown) and till then everything was ok, but this time the page was deleted, for notability (real reaso: pro-white, I should not have written pro-White in the article)! It's a luck I found this wiki, thanks for standing for the truth! ... Bh3u4m 19:06, 25 July 2007 (CEST)
- Marxism is ok on wikipedia, being pro-European is not. -- Doktor_Faustus 25 July 2007
- I guess that was pretty much expected, the same thing happened at the Swedish Wikipedia a while ago. --Günther 21:33, 19 July 2007 (CEST)
PPOV - Political Point of View
Interesting rant. One thing surprises me most: the article implies that most of the Wikipedian topics cover politically related topics, and thus can be measured by using Political Point of View. I daresay this is the minority of articles: most articles have no political contant, meaning or intention, apart from those who believe that Darwin or Ptolemaios was leftist, or that the working of a human cell is based on leftist dogmas. Your opinion is based on the minority of articls related to politics and recent events, most probably including history of the last 200 years, including today. many Wikipedians couldn't care less about these topics, because they result controversy and accomplish little on th large scale of human knowledge. (Now, really, who'll give a flying f*ck who is the president of the US 200 years from now? Or whether a politician is gay, black or believe in fairies?)
So I believe this article - and this metapedia - is heavily slanting towards politically charged themes and topics, which is okay, but should be spelled out, not hidden behind "arts and culture". Yes, Wikipedia is controversion about these topics. True, but try not to act as a general enciclopedia. Try writing rightist about gas clouds, titanium-dioxide or the Triceratops, and you'll get my drift. :-) --Grin 15:01, 12 August 2008 (CEST)
The article seems good on facts or what may well be facts. But the tone is bad news. It is a rant which is going to put people off even if they are fellow travellers. It could do with a major re-write.
Answer to grin's ideas
Metapedia starts on politically charged subjects, that is true. However, eventually as it goes on and more and more people join, will have room and power to handle also more general subjects. It makes no sense to say, it limits itself to politics. Correct is, it starts with politics, and it handles other subjects step by step. --Hu1 18:00, 22 November 2008 (CET)
Chinese Wiki
The Chinese character in Baidu means "hundred," not "white." Also, "Baidu" happens to be the Chinese Google; apparently they're branching out into Wikis now. And of COURSE Baidu is growing faster. It's smaller and has more to catch up on. If they maintain the same growth rate after reaching the same size as Wikipedia, THEN you can start making a big deal about things.
