Wikipedia’s Astrology-Edit controversy
Did you know that Wikipedia has decided that editors who have not edited topics on the site other than Astrology subjects cannot edit Wikipedia entries that concern the topic of….Astrology?
Yes, it surprises me, too, and the change seems quite crazy especially considering how in some circles the use and study of Astrology is controversial on its own. Is a skew now in force to sway readers against the venerable art and science of Astrology?
If so, the sound we hear may be Kepler, Copernicus, Lilly, and Nostradamus creakingly turning in their graves.
That’s going to be centuries’ worth of information to get wrong by sceptics with their own skews and misconceptions, dear Wikipedia – and I thought you were supposedly so…democratic!
Advertisement
Thank goodness–I thought I’d heard Edgar Cayce turn in his grave as well.
Whew,
<3.
Jaxxy
March 29, 2011 at 11:34 pm
Ken, thanks very much for the clarification. What I’d read about it seemed confusing and, as it turns out, was more complex than it first appeared!
Jude
Jude Cowell
March 24, 2011 at 2:13 pm
Not exactly correct. I was one of the banned editors and my editing status has now been restored. The WP policy is not intended to block editors of astrology articles, but to discourage single purpose accounts (SPAs), an edit account that is devoted to one topic or subject only. This is a debatable policy, which has parallels to the banning of single purpose lobbying in politics. There is no doubt that single purpose accounts can exercise a lot of leverage, and in many cases that has been a good thing. From what I’ve seen on WP, SPAs are discouraged, but not strictly enforced.
Ken McRitchie
March 24, 2011 at 1:51 pm