236
edits
Changes
MyWikiBiz, Author Your Legacy — Saturday October 05, 2024
Jump to navigationJump to searchThe case against Gwen Gale (view source)
Revision as of 01:42, 16 February 2012
, 01:42, 16 February 2012→Gwen Gale makes a fool of yourself and of Wikipedia
==Gwen Gale makes a fool of yourself and of Wikipedia==
==Gwen Gale makes a fool of yourself and of Wikipedia==
A few days ago professor Timothy Messer-Kruse shared his experience in editing Wikipedia. In particular he recalls part of his exchange with Gwen Gale:[http://chronicle.com/article/The-Undue-Weight-of-Truth-on/130704/ "Explain to me, then, how a 'minority' source with facts on its side would ever appear against a wrong 'majority' one?" I asked the Wiki-gatekeeper. He responded, "You're more than welcome to discuss reliable sources here, that's what the talk page is for. However, you might want to have a quick look at Wikipedia's civility policy."]
A few days ago professor Timothy Messer-Kruse shared his experience in editing Wikipedia. In particular he recalls part of his exchange with Gwen Gale:[http://chronicle.com/article/The-Undue-Weight-of-Truth-on/130704/ "Explain to me, then, how a 'minority' source with facts on its side would ever appear against a wrong 'majority' one?" I asked the Wiki-gatekeeper. He responded, "You're more than welcome to discuss reliable sources here, that's what the talk page is for. However, you might want to have a quick look at Wikipedia's civility policy."]
The complete conversation is preserved [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Haymarket_affair&oldid=477110217#.22No_Evidence.22 here]:
{{cquote|Fine. I see I will have to fight these battles one at a time. I will start with the most obvious. Here is a "majority" source, indeed the most often-cited source for information on Haymarket there is, Paul Avrich, The Haymarket Tragedy: from page 190: "Spies had heard that two men had been killed, apparently the correct number, but when he picked up the Daily News, the paper reported six deaths." So, it should be evident that this authoratitive source also agrees the proper number should be TWO. As for you claim about Wikipedia's policy, your characterization of it is absurd, especially if the "majority" source that is cited can be shown to be factually wrong. Explain to me, then, how a "minority" source with facts on its side would ever appear against a wrong "majority" one?MesserKruse (talk) 17:41, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
You're more than welcome to discuss reliable sources here, that's what the talk page is for. However, you might want to have a quick look at Wikipedia's civility policy. Gwen Gale (talk) 17:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC) }}
Gwen Gale was also the one who "welcomed" the professor to Wikipedia:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AMesserKruse&action=historysubmit&diff=265745449&oldid=265745388 "Did you make this edit while not logged in to this account? You may want to have a look at Wikipedia's policy on sockpuppets. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:00, 22 January 2009 (UTC)"]
Professor Timothy Messer-Kruse who is a world famous expert on the subject was ordered to review [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CIVIL "Wikipedia's civility policy"] although he was civil, and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet "Wikipedia's policy on sockpuppets"] simply because he forgot to log in.
==Bloggers about Gwen Gale==
==Bloggers about Gwen Gale==
