Scientologists in Wiki-trouble
-
- June
- 9
Do you ever wonder about Wikipedia?
I do. Who writes this stuff? Who are these people who supposedly safeguard for accuracy?
Why do people do it? How do they find the time?
I don’t get it.
We do know that people and organizations update their sites to improve their public image.
But the Church of Scientology has apparently been banned from doing its own edits.
You can read the long Wikipedia page about the case. I skimmed it. There are lots and lots of findings and decisions, like this one:
*****
Any editor who, in the judgment of an uninvolved administrator, is (i) focused primarily on Scientology or Scientologists and (ii) clearly engaged in promoting an identifiable agenda may be topic-banned for up to one year. Any editor topic banned under this sanction may be re-blocked at the expiry of a topic ban if they recommence editing in the topic having made few or no significant edits outside of it during the period of the topic ban.
*****
There is also this warning about the “editing environment:”
*****
Both experienced and new editors on articles related to Scientology are cautioned that this topic has previously been the subject of disruptive editing by both admirers and critics of Scientology making this topic a hostile editing environment. Editors are reminded that when working on highly contentious topics, it is crucial that all editors adhere strictly to fundamental Wikipedia policies, including but not limited to maintaining a neutral point of view, citing disputed statements to reliable sources, avoiding edit-warring and uncivil comments, and complying at all times with the policy on biographies of living persons in reference to the various living people whose names come up from time to time in these articles.
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, June 9th, 2009 at 1:16 pm by Gary Stern.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Print
| 
Email
The world of religion, we don't have to tell you, is vast. The purpose of this blog is for Stern to note, flag and comment on some of the more interesting religious developments on the scene – weighty and quirky, somber and laughable, far away and just down the road. He won't interpret Scripture, take sides in conflicts or judge anyone. But he will take advantage of the journalist's license to observe.
