Thursday, March 22, 2007



Brent Bozell has a great article over on Investor Business Daily about the free on-line “Encyclopedia” created, edited on-line, and referred to by many of the “Progressive” Left…

My first experience with “Wikipedia” was shortly after the first Senator George Allen \ Jim Webb debate that was held at the Homestead last year. During that debate Senator Allen brought up a Virginia State related issue concerning the Port and area around Craney Island. Jim Webb was caught off guard and did not know of any of the projects conducted there by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, it’s major fueling depot for the United States Navy, and critical habitat for birds such as pelicans, osprey, piping plover, and other endangered species.

Within days I found reference to Craney Island, and the use of it by Senator Allen to show how little Jim Webb knew of the State of Virginia which he now represents in Congress, on Wikipedia and linked to by many Liberal Bloggers.

The interesting thing was not the information concerning the actual Craney Island but the use of this issue in a debate. (The reference to the Allen\Webb debate has since been removed).

“Wikipedia is an "open-source" encyclopedia, a reference source anyone can create. The danger in this system becomes very obvious, very quickly.

Recently, the comedian and movie star Sinbad had to announce that he was not, in fact, dead of a heart attack at age 50, as his Wikipedia entry claimed. "Somebody vandalized the page," claimed Wikipedia spokeswoman Sandra Ordonez.”

So if you need a source to refer to why not go to one that can\will be written to fit the agenda?

“Not only can Wikipedia articles be written by anyone with Internet access; others can then edit that material by adding off-setting and consequently off-putting material whose purpose is to create intellectual mischief.”

But how can this be? It looks like an on-line encyclopedia. It has impressive graphics and many links. It uses such a “Progressive” format.

“You can add to that the problem with the credentials of its staff. One of its editors, named only "Essjay" online and described in his user profile "as a tenured professor of religion at a private university with expertise in canon law," was recently exposed as a 24-year-old college kid in Kentucky. He resigned in disgrace — even though Wikipedia tried to retain him, claiming he'd edited thousands of articles with flair.”

Want some more “Flair”? Check out the section on Jim Webb that Wikipedia maintains… Beware…


Anonymous said...

Funny you bring this up. I have observed, on plenty of occasions, a certain local progressive "pragmatic" blogger who frequently uses Wikipedia as argumentative "proof" sources. The accuracy of Wikipedia should only be taken tongue-in-cheek.

zen said...

Well, "Steve Harkonnen" I'll consider your criticizms just as soon as you find something factually inaccurate with my sourcing of Wikipedia. Until then you of all people really have no credibility to accuse anyone else of being somehow misleading do you?