Global Warming Activist Topic-Banned From Wikipedia

Bradley J. Fikes Bradley J. Fikes 3 Comments

Share

Wikipedia is supposed to be a source of information, not propaganda. But William M. Connolley, who blogs under the name Stoat, has repeatedly abused his administrator position at Wikipedia to bias climate change-related articles to reflect his CAGW (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming) activism.

But no more. After extensive run-ins with Connolley, Wikipedia has banned him from participating in climate change articles.

Read the rest of the article on my North County Times Sci-Tech blog by clicking here.

Share

Comments 3

  1. Wikipedia cannot be trusted on political issues. They put one “god” in charge of a topic (such as global warming). The “god” is always from the left, and arbitrarily bans editing from opposing viewpoints, sometimes even with terrific sources. Conversely, they allow friendly posts that lack sources. Some of the examples I’ve seen are simply breathtaking.

    Two areas I’ve had considerable experience in this is “Proposition 13” and “California High Speed Rail.” The HJTA confirms that it is often blocked in providing factual info on the Prop 13 article. Indeed, the Prop 13 “article” is really a compendium of complaints by various liberal groups and individuals — with only a passing nod to the benefits of Prop 13.

    Wikipedia is great for nonpolitical topics — sports, most history, bios, etc. But NEVER trust Wikipedia on controversial topics.

  2. One simple example on Wikipedia’s Prop 13 article — there is a claim that CA sales taxes rose to offset loss of revenue because of Prop 13. I sent in a fully documented list of states that (without a Prop 13 in place) also raised their sales taxes by as much or more than did California since the implementation of Prop 13.

    I could not get it posted. It was erased several times, even when I tried dumbed down variations.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *