Is the DLC currently trying message control at Wikipedia?

[mmonk]

I linked to the Democratic Leadership Council at Wikipedia for a new post on my blog concerning Gate's admission the reasons for the Iraq war were invalid.

Check it out yourself with the "warnings" about accuracy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Leadership_Council"> Link to Wikipedia

[NJmaverick]

1. .

:tinfoilhat:

[Enrique]

2. the DLC's image has plummetted

politicians used to brag about being "New Democrats". Now we have democrats asking the DLC to take their name off the DLC's website.

Obviously they will want to try to restore their reputations.

[davidinalameda]

6. who has asked the DLC to do that

[Enrique]

11. Obama, most famously n/t

[davidinalameda]

20. who else?

[DJ13]

7. Obviously they will want to try to restore their reputations.

....... without actually changing their political policies.

[Ozymanithrax]

3. I read it, and it seems about as accurate as any Wikipedia article.

What bothered you? Give us a quote.

[mmonk]

5. Nothing actually. I was pointing out all the warnings about disputes

concerning accuracy.

[Ozymanithrax]

8. Well, Wikipedia has had problems in the past, and has yet to live them down.

Good articles there can be quite good. Though, I do not use Wikipedia in any of the papers I've written for my Bachelors degree or the Master's I'm working on, I often look at their sources in the research phase. If an article is shy on sources, I don't trust it.

From what I've seen, Wikipedia has improved over time.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

12. Not really. That's a matter of public misperception.

The articles in Wikipedia are as accurate and informative as equivalent articles in any major encyclopedia, Encyclopedia Britannica, for example. They have been for years.

No, you wouldn't use it as a reference in your Masters degree thesis, but you wouldn't use Encyclopedia Britannica either.

[Ozymanithrax]

15. I didn't say my thesis. But my college does not accept Wikipeida...

as a reference in any paper.

[area51]

4. Well, I think they're certainly trying message control here via certain posters. n/t

[JVS]

9. Maybe we could set up Centristipedia as a satire.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

10. Clearly they've bought out that corporatist wikipedia.

That article says nothing about baby raping and puppy eating, which we all know the DLC performs every tuesday and thursday.

[superduperfarleft]

13. Oh good lord....

:eyes:

[Brickbat]

14. Pretty much every Wikipedia article has those warnings. And if you find an article that doesn't, it

probably should.

[stray cat]

16. Paranoia - not everyone is out to get you; and some just have different opinions than yours

[Gman]

17. words fail me....

the way people perceive the DLC here.

[Arkana]

18. Your paranoia is astounding. The DLC barely has the power to influence someone's

lunch order, let alone national politics.

[mmonk]

19. Au contraire. I'm not paranoid at all. Just asking about something

I noticed. I know if someone doesn't like what is said on Wikipedia, they challenge it.