000Edit wars over Israel spur rare ban of 8 Wikipedia editors.
schnurritoWikis are unsuitable for anything contentious. Wikis are the solution to the problem of crowdsourcing objective facts, what makes them great is that anyone can add a few (even very obscure) ones; on anything contentious there are way too many, not too few, people wanting to write about them, making the wiki a solution to a nonexistent problem. This news story is yet another example of this.
… and hardly anything is more contentious than Israel/Palestine, which is why wikis work least well for articles on that.
GorkThere’s currently a big hubbub going on in the Wikipedia Gulf of Mexico talk page about changing the name to Gulf of America.
I took a really big shit the other day. Like, really BIG. We can call it the shit of the americas and anyone that disagrees could make it a big hubbub.
Just because it was a president saying something stupid does not prevent it from being stupid.
Wikipedia was here before those dudes and will be here after them. They are small in the grad scale of things.