Slashdot Mirror

Let's say I walked into the library and marked up their encyclopedias with red ink (making legitimate corrections, in my opinion). Would you consider that credible?

Having a bunch of self-proclaimed "experts" write the encyclopedia (or the news, god forbid) is a commendable hobby. I just wouldn't believe a word of it until it passes through some kind of editorial review. "A bunch of people on the Internet think it's good" does not constitute an editorial review.

Wikipedia can be exploited for all sorts of reasons -- to make a political statement, to self-aggrandize, and to impart personal bias (whether intentionally or otherwise) in lightly-trafficked areas. This article explores just how successful one troll can be in disrupting the flow of things for a while -- and how the entire world can witness it.

My compatriot said that this article was ten pages long. I wouldn't read any of it, because the New York Times is liberally biased and not committed to Information Liberation.

Could someone please write this as an article on Wikinews?

I don't read the New York Times any more; I prefer to get my news from the community.

Could someone please write an unbiased, neutral point of view article about this subject on WikiNews?

Thank you for your help.

What I think wikinews needs, and indeed all wikis, is authorship so we can see who said what. If we implement something with PGP signatures, people can build reputations over time, and newcomers can filter out information from authors with no rep.

The basic form of this already exists. You can view the history of modifications for any article, and even see the diffs between any two versions. Here's an example.

Granted, this isn't exactly what you're suggesting; it's just the same 'good enough' approach that wikis have always relied on, and it's certainly a reasonable solution to the problem.

Also, Eloquence a.k.a. Eric Moller is a "lead instigator of the Wikinews project", as well as the "content partnership coordinator for the Wikimedia foundation" (from here).

Let him have his moment.

Yeah, I don't think this is going to work out, either, since this article on The School of the Americas is already turning into a shitstorm and not moving out of review.
I particularly love the guy who is on and on about it being biased and that the school probably didn't do anything wrong and then is talking about not knowing what Argentina's dirty war was. I suspect, along with the parent, that this isn't going to work out too well. Editorial to the lowest common denominator doesn't work out all that well. (preparing for the inveitable spate of posts saying that slashdot proves me wrong...)

Sorry, forgot about trailing slash. Correct link is http://wikinews.org/11/

Here is a link http://wikinews.org/11

Wikinews is the future of journalism.

I think the future of journalism is Wikinews More info