Hype_logo the creative publishing network Nav_explore Aboutconvzne + join Critical Eyes Sign up Log in
ZINES ||| Top Rated | New | Random
Explore more >
Mini Mini Mini Mini Mini Mini
> view all 8


Awards: 3 11/11

Wikipedia - Voting Dictates The Truth

Aug 20, 2011 • 5 comments • 2959 views

Are you an expert in some field or discipline? Do you like to write? Do you want to share your knowledge ? It is simple - become a contributor of Wikipedia encyclopedia. If the field of your interest is empty on their page, you are lucky and should look forward to your contribution for the general education of people on your beloved topic. Pay special attention to good references if your topic is of contested topic not understood by the majority type. 


Then, lets start to write an article: Sign up, learn "wikitext" coding and marks, read many annoying rules, never forget to respect them and try to be in every way NEUTRAL in your piece. Write carefully, rationally, without emotions and support your statements by proving them with relevant references.


Week by week, you gather all necessary references, fine-tune your article and start searching for images or diagrams which bypass any copyright laws. A lengthy work on the issue, but one day - the article is ready. It is time to finally press the magic button: "Save page". Your work appears in its full glory.




A few hours later....

What ?!
Where it is ?
What´s happened ?
Your article is not there.
Aha, maybe some mistake, you've probably entered a bad link.
No, it is right, where is the problem ?!
Again.... what the hell ?!!


Yes, it is what it is. Your article was deleted. An uncomfortable surprise for the contributor of Wikipedia.
But why ? Ask an admin.


Many questions, no response. You can only find the name of the user who deleted it with short notice: "nonsense." Your blank page looks at you with a derisive grimace. You are starting to be angry. How is it possible to say "nonsense" and delete the article without pointing out any flaws. You must write to that person, it is arrogance, incredible......"My article is correct, full of references from experts, how can you delete my article without any reason ?!"


Finally response !
What ?!!
You don´t believe your eyes: "It is nonsense, so i can."

Your hands are leaving the keyboard, where a lot of time was spent and dropped hands limp at your sides. 


No - cheer up again - you must ask another administrator....

The beginning of the response looks correctly, but what is it ? You don´t understand. The article was deleted, because it is out of "consensus". What consensus ? All of my research with its list of hard references subject to some consensus ? You are confused. And consensus of whom ?

Another response won´t come. Being helpless, you became angry. This is not possible! "I have knowledge and my article is supported by many demonstrable facts. This is unprecedented arrogant behaviour" you write to that "greaser" in absolute despair.


"If you will continue to attack other users, we will block your access" is the response of some supervisor. You stare back in shock at your vacant submission to Wikipedia. Your work finished.


Later, you will find, that there exists some voting mechanism which decides the material to be published based on a general consensus of users who may not be educated in the issue and stand stern behind the similarly clueless majority. Who are these nerds controlling the Wikipedia knowledge base, a supernatural power, hidden in the clouds of virtual subconsciousness and wrapped by the net of internet cables ?


No wonder you don´t have any taste to continue. "Finita comedia".



The deletion of an article that can bring valuable information, despite being relatively new, and which is supported by relevant sources and then deleted instead of carefully edited to meet Wiki standards, is unfortunately a more common occurrence than most care to entertain unless you are a contributor. The administrators frequently cross over the rules that they themselves set. Not only that, but they made the rules, that allow to them to decide above all. The officially installed institution of "voting" is not always an expression of democracy, but in reality some good looking system of censorship.


If the truth is determined by a "consensus“, acquired by a plebiscite of anonymous, professionally unconfirmed "experts“, absurdity becomes king of the world. As Wikipedia creators commonly invoke this mechanism and this encyclopedia is the most visited source of information, one can only look on with a sarcastic smile and with honest compassion for their victims, longing for knowledge. According to their "logic“ it is necessary to vote not only about your article, but undoubtedly also about the shape of the Earth.


By Wikipedia standards If the majority believes 2+2 = 5, then it is the TRUTH

If the majority believes the holocaust didn't happen, then it is the TRUTH

If the majority believes the world is flat, then it is the TRUTH

Long live the TRUTH

Also appears in:

Holographic Universe


Jan, thank you for your submission. Brilliant post and important, not many people, myself included, were aware of the mechanisms at work in the Wiki knowledge empire. Great piece!
08.20.11 •
Thank you, it is my personal experience
08.20.11 •
i am sorry, i sent the article by mistake to "depth of field", but i don´t know how to take it back
08.20.11 •
excellent work here...really enjoyed this.
08.29.11 •
08.31.11 •
leave comment at bottom
submitting ...