Wikipedia "defames Sharyl Attkisson again"

[Poetlister]

Though it’s a moving target that changes day-by-day, Wikpedia’s vaccine industry agenda editors are at it again. Besides the other longstanding false and defamatory information edited onto my Wikipedia bio page, new false information has appeared.

sharylattkisson.com

[Moral Hazard]

Though it’s a moving target that changes day-by-day, Wikpedia’s vaccine industry agenda editors are at it again. Besides the other longstanding false and defamatory information edited onto my Wikipedia bio page, new false information has appeared.

sharylattkisson.com

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharyl_At ... _reporting

In the Attkisson biography, the vaccination-reporting section seems like a textbook example of original research by way of synthesis (WP:NOR (T-H-L), WP:No original research (T-H-L) and WP:Syn (T-H-L), WP:NOR#Synthesis_of_published_material (T-H-L)).

For example, the biography of Sharyl Attkisson (T-H-L) cites Snopes and a teacher of science-writing to attack Attkisson.

Per WP:BLP (T-H-L) (WP:Biographies of Living Persons (T-H-L)), Wikipedia should use only reliable sources discussing Attkisson (WP:RS (T-H-L), WP:Reliable Sources (T-H-L)).

Links to the article on vaccination and autism should suffice to orient the reader, unless there is a report discussing her from an Academy of Science, etc.

[Randy from Boise]

For example, the biography of Sharyl Attkisson (T-H-L) cites Snopes and a teacher of science-writing to attack Attkisson.

The article by Snopes editor-at-large Lloyd Grove to which you refer is an interview-based biography of her of presumed reliability. It is a perfectly fine source.

linkhttps://www.thedailybeast.com/sharyl-at ... -reporting[/link]

And here is the relevant section on Attkisson and anti-vax:

Braving brickbats from members of the establishment—be they political, scientific or medical—Attkisson has ventured into unorthodox areas of journalism, such as her series of reports on CBS on possible links between autism and childhood vaccines.

Attkisson says she is very much in favor of vaccinating kids, but that peer-reviewed studies have suggested the possibility of a “small subset of children” who suffer from difficult-to-detect immune deficiencies that might make their brains vulnerable to certain vaccines, much like some children are allergic to polio vaccines.

But she says Big Pharma has actively discouraged scientific research into possible linkages, and that pharmaceutical advertisers similarly persuaded CBS and other broadcasters not to run stories questioning the risk of vaccines for certain children. Never mind that a CBS News veteran, who asked not to be named, says Attkisson’s vaccine-autism reports were eventually killed not because of advertiser pressure, but because they weren’t adequately supported by scientific evidence.

“The fact is, the government has acknowledged there’s a link,” Attkisson says, citing the recent admission by a senior Central for Disease Control epidemiologist that he and his colleagues improperly omitted from a 2004 study the data that tended to support such a link. “They simply say it’s not a causal link.”

Is Wikipedia unfair to this "independent journalist" who "honestly doesn't care what people think" about her reporting?

Here's the lead to her WP article:

Sharyl Attkisson (born 1961)[4] is an American writer and host of Full Measure with Sharyl Attkisson on television stations operated by Sinclair Broadcast Group, the largest television station operator in the United States.[5]

She is a five-time Emmy Award winner, and an RTNDA Edward R. Murrow Award recipient. She was formerly an investigative correspondent in the Washington bureau for CBS News and a substitute anchor for the CBS Evening News.

Attkisson resigned from CBS News on March 10, 2014, after 21 years with the network. She later authored the book Stonewalled, in which she alleged that CBS News failed to give sufficient coverage of Obama controversies, such as the 2012 Benghazi attack.[6] Attkisson has published stories suggesting a possible link between vaccines and autism, a theory rejected by the scientific community.

And here is the relevant section of the body:

Anti-vaccine reporting

In her reporting, Attkisson has published stories linking vaccines with autism; this contradicts the scientific community who reject such a link.[38][39][40] Seth Mnookin, Professor of Science Writing at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, described Attkisson as "one of the least responsible mainstream journalists covering vaccines and autism. Again and again, she’s parroted anti-vaccine rhetoric long past the point that it’s been decisively disproved."[41]

Anna Kata, an analyst at McMaster University, has accused Attkisson of using problematic rhetorical tactics to "imply that because there is no conclusive answer to certain problems, vaccines remain a plausible culprit."[42][verification needed] Attkisson has said that she favors vaccinating children but that research suggests that "small subset of children" have immune deficiencies that might make their brains vulnerable to vaccines.[1] She has said that pharmaceutical companies have discouraged research into a possible vaccine-autism link, and that they pressured CBS News not to run stories about it.[43]

In a January 2019 episode of her television show Full Measure, Attkisson mischaracterized statements made in 2007 by a medical expert, Andrew Zimmerman, regarding a hypothetical relationship between vaccines and autism. Attkisson falsely said that the Omnibus Autism Proceeding (OAP), which refuted claims of a causal link between vaccines and autism, was based primarily on Zimmerman's testimony, and that Zimmerman's nuanced views on the subject were kept hidden from the public by the federal government until 2018; the program called it "one of the most consequential frauds, arguably in human history."[disputed – discuss] In fact, the OAP's verdict that there is no causal link between vaccines and autism was based on testimony by nine expert witnesses, and the views that Attkisson said were kept secret had already been made public in 2006 and were noted in the OAP.[44]

That seems pretty much on point to me.

Her husband is a retired attorney and she's very intent on playing the Defamed Martyr in Search of Justice card.

I wouldn't touch this bio with a ten foot pole at this point.

RfB

P.S. Just ran a check and am delighted to verify I have contributed zero edits to this piece.

[Randy from Boise]

Fortunately for the world, Sharyl Attkisson has now graced us with her own PERFECTLY UNBIASED Wikipedia-style biography:

linkhttps://sharylattkisson.com/2019/06/sha ... aphy-page/[/link]

I am pleased that she does manage to mention Sinclair Broadcasting in the body of the piece; it is there if you read for it.

Noting that she here claims to be a 5th Degree blackbelt in Tae Kwon Do, I will now shut the fuck up and move along.

(Vigilant is free to challenge her to a street fight, of course.)

RfB

[Poetlister]

Never mind that a CBS News veteran, who asked not to be named, says Attkisson’s vaccine-autism reports were eventually killed not because of advertiser pressure, but because they weren’t adequately supported by scientific evidence.

That is presumably not something she said. Is Lloyd Grove an adequately reliable source for confirming what an anonymous source said? Not that I doubt the substance; it seems pretty plausible.

[Randy from Boise]

Never mind that a CBS News veteran, who asked not to be named, says Attkisson’s vaccine-autism reports were eventually killed not because of advertiser pressure, but because they weren’t adequately supported by scientific evidence.

That is presumably not something she said. Is Lloyd Grove an adequately reliable source for confirming what an anonymous source said? Not that I doubt the substance; it seems pretty plausible.

Snopes pretty much exists to debunk and validate assertions made in the press. That's their niche. High reliability.

RfB

[Poetlister]

Snopes pretty much exists to debunk and validate assertions made in the press. That's their niche. High reliability.

RfB

Snopes is an excellent site, but how would you prove to a cynical Wikipedian who doubts something you said which is only supported by Snopes that it is indeed highly reliable? You must have been involved in a few situations where people queried the reliability of your sources.

[Vigilant]

Fortunately for the world, Sharyl Attkisson has now graced us with her own PERFECTLY UNBIASED Wikipedia-style biography:

linkhttps://sharylattkisson.com/2019/06/sha ... aphy-page/[/link]

I am pleased that she does manage to mention Sinclair Broadcasting in the body of the piece; it is there if you read for it.

Noting that she here claims to be a 5th Degree blackbelt in Tae Kwon Do, I will now shut the fuck up and move along.

(Vigilant is free to challenge her to a street fight, of course.)

RfB

I looked up the TKD place she trains at.
http://www.ustma.com/

Facebook page
https://www.facebook.com/ustmatkd/

It's jazzercise and belts are 'earned' by length of membership, not skill.

In high school, I took two years of TKD from a guy who was a world light heavy weight full contact champ. Every practice session involved light and heavy (pads) contact.

I doubt Ms. Attkisson has ever taken, or given, a hard shot.
I'm certain she has no appreciable full contact tournament experience.

This 'black belt' is about as scary as a pudding pop.

Edit:
This is the money shot...
http://www.ustma.com/faqs/

Are there additional costs?

There is a $60.00 testing fee for students testing for their next belt level. Higher fees apply to black belts.

There are additional costs for sparring gear, uniforms, nunchucks (edit: WTF?!), and optional USTMA merchandise.


How often is testing?

We have belt promotion testing at USTMA every 2 months. Though testing is offered, not everyone will qualify for testing. Of course, in order to progress, testing is necessary.


How do students qualify for testing?

The student must attend a minimum of 15 classes per belt semester. (The 2 months between tests.)

The student must pre-test and demonstrate to the masters and instructors a good understanding of the curriculum requirements.

The student must have “satisfactory” or “excellent” behavior at school and at home. A form will be sent home for parents and teachers to check off.


What is the testing process?

Pre-tests are given during regular class times one week prior to the promotional testing.

Upon passing the pre-test, students receive a testing form to fill out. This includes the behavior evaluation form for teachers to fill out.

Return the completed testing form along with $60.00 payment to the front desk before testing day.

Three days,Thursday–Saturday is designated just for testing. There will be no regular classes on these days.

Make-up testing is available the following week to any students unable to test during the prior week.

It's a belt mill, day care and general feel good, do nothing time sink.
As an added bonus, you must purchase your equipment from them and they have an available 'gym membership/wellness program' available for the low, low charge of an additional $100/month...

Grifters in gis

Edit2:
From here
https://www.yelp.com/biz/us-tae-kwon-do ... y-leesburg

Beware. Once you sign the contract, there is NO WAY to back out of the full 3 year program - thousands of dollars overall. Grandmaster says it's all up to the billing company, the billing company says it's up to the Grandmaster, you get the run around.

Grandmaster Choi also insists on meeting with your kids if they don't want to come anymore. I'm not doing that to my kids - it is my decision whether or not to let them quit. My kids loved martial arts - but not at this place. So I won't force them just because I made a huge mistake.

I also have to say that testing and promotion here is kind of a joke. My kids have been to a traditional Tae Kwon Do academy in a different state and if the kids didn't know their form or couldn't do their kicks or whatever, they were not allowed to progress. I have seen children who obviously did not know what they were doing, just get promoted because they had been to enough classes. Definitely a 'every kid deserves a trophy' kind of place.

Just another softheaded day for Sharyl Attkinsson.

Edit3: Bonus video I have no words.

[Bezdomni]

When are we going to see your pre-bout pictures, Vigilant? I'll be impressed if you can top the snow shot cutout. But wait... should you really be the one doing the promo-shoots for Graaf & Ms. A before you digit 'em down on live keyboard cam?

I noticed that the last person who contacted Ms. Attkisson from WPO (got?) disappeared.

[Johnny Au]

Is she related to Andrew Wakefield (T-H-L)?

[Randy from Boise]

Is she related to Andrew Wakefield (T-H-L)?

Somebody should go for a big troll and write a Sharyl Attkisson-style PERFECTLY UNBIASED COI-lite CV-biography of Dr. Wakefield and submit it to the Sharyl Attkisson Alternative Facts Rival Wiki. Nothing but achievements and happy talk spin...

That's a pretty funny concept, actually.

t

[Randy from Boise]

Snopes pretty much exists to debunk and validate assertions made in the press. That's their niche. High reliability.

RfB

Snopes is an excellent site, but how would you prove to a cynical Wikipedian who doubts something you said which is only supported by Snopes that it is indeed highly reliable? You must have been involved in a few situations where people queried the reliability of your sources.

Orange Mike called me out for using something published by the John Birch Society to support fine biographical details once. The stuff stayed because it was obviously true, as I recall. I doubt similar objection would be raised to Snopes. It honestly doesn't come up much but I admittedly don't tread in the BLP snakepit very often. Subjects who are dead tend to object less frequently and less vehemently than those who are living.

RfB



(See: Timbo's Rule 25: "Biographies of Dead People are easier to source out than Biographies of Living People. The subjects also tend to complain less about the content.")

[Guido den Broeder]

In view of my green judo belt that I earned 52 years ago, I can probably beat her.

[Poetlister]

In view of my green judo belt that I earned 52 years ago, I can probably beat her.

[Vigilant]

You guys should read her twitter.

https://twitter.com/SharylAttkisson

She's a in full grifter mode.
She tussles with Gamaliel and Larry Sanger is tonguing her ass.


https://twitter.com/SharylAttkisson/sta ... 1443253249

https://twitter.com/lsanger/status/1142832609912922112

If there were ever a reason to utterly discard and shreds of credibility that Larry Sanger was clutching to, this is it.


The article talk page is a hoot.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Shar ... ng_process

Sharyl makes an appearance by IP which geolocates to Greece.



Here everpedia article is a commercial for her.

https://everipedia.org/wiki/lang_en/Sharyl_Attkisson

Larry Sanger, you have no ethics.

[Vigilant]

Can someone invite her here?

[Randy from Boise]

You guys should read her twitter.

https://twitter.com/SharylAttkisson

She's a in full grifter mode.
She tussles with Gamaliel and Larry Sanger is tonguing her ass.


https://twitter.com/SharylAttkisson/sta ... 1443253249

https://twitter.com/lsanger/status/1142832609912922112

If there were ever a reason to utterly discard and shreds of credibility that Larry Sanger was clutching to, this is it.

That would be a study in the field of nanotechnology...

RfB

[Randy from Boise]

Here everpedia article is a commercial for her.

https://everipedia.org/wiki/lang_en/Sharyl_Attkisson

Larry Sanger, you have no ethics.

She's born in 1961, like I was (almost 10 months earlier, actually), but is only 56 years old according to the amazing supernova fireball Everipedia.

I want her publicist!

Paging Larry Sanger!!!

RfB

[Poetlister]

Here everpedia article is a commercial for her.

https://everipedia.org/wiki/lang_en/Sharyl_Attkisson

Larry Sanger, you have no ethics.

Did Larry write it himself? He can scarcely be held responsible for every article there!

[Randy from Boise]

Here everpedia article is a commercial for her.

https://everipedia.org/wiki/lang_en/Sharyl_Attkisson

Larry Sanger, you have no ethics.

Did Larry write it himself? He can scarcely be held responsible for every article there!

It would be nice if the brilliant megaflash supernova Everipedia had a transparent way to check the edit history to find out, wouldn't it?

RfB

[Vigilant]

Here everpedia article is a commercial for her.

https://everipedia.org/wiki/lang_en/Sharyl_Attkisson

Larry Sanger, you have no ethics.

Did Larry write it himself? He can scarcely be held responsible for every article there!

It would be nice if the brilliant megaflash supernova Everipedia had a transparent way to check the edit history to find out, wouldn't it?

RfB

He posted the article to Attkinsson's twitter feed as a self congratulatory link.
"Here, look at your article on MY site!"
So, yes, I think it's safe to tar him with it.

[Katie]

I recall reading that the Homeopathy article on Citizendium used to be terribly pro-homeopathy and was written by two devotees of it. It was even on the front page. Not too surprising then that Larry Sanger would write a puff piece about an anti-vaccine activist.

[The Garbage Scow]

Antivaxxer cretins... they grow like the measles virus in someone who had the misfortune of being born to... antivaxxer cretins. Her article is also missing the categories [[Category:Autism pseudoscience]] and [[Category:Anti-vaccination activists]].

[Vigilant]

Her newest diatribe

https://sharylattkisson.com/2019/06/the ... wikipedia/

While I share some of her concerns around the entrenched interests, most of this is "I want to control my article and make it a commercial for my interests" bullshit.

The comments left on her page are from the softheaded "skeptics" who've decided that they do better science than people who train their entire lives doing science because they saw something on Good Morning America and now they're "woke".

[Vigilant]

This twitter thread shows just how venal Larry Sanger is when it comes to acquiring attention, even when reflected from a diseased source.

https://twitter.com/lsanger/status/1143572753502654464

Any port in a storm, eh Larry?

[Poetlister]

Of course, while what Larry says may not apply in this particular case, it is indeed a good summary of what goes on far too often on Wikipedia.

What a perfect little encapsulation of the social problems with Wikipedia: (a) unreasonable policies, (b) cited dogmatically, (c) that don't apply in this case and thus are a red herring, (d) for politically biased reasons, grasping at straws, etc.

[iii]

I recall reading that the Homeopathy article on Citizendium used to be terribly pro-homeopathy and was written by two devotees of it. It was even on the front page. Not too surprising then that Larry Sanger would write a puff piece about an anti-vaccine activist.

Larry Sanger is the founding member of the cult of NPOV which used to hold considerable sway at critics sites as well as on Wikipedia generally (Cla68 is/was another acolyte as was The Devil's Advocate and Lar). This kind of radical neutrality really only works when it comes to describing conflicts where there is no strong evidence or factual bases about which side is correct. It does not work when you are trying to explain the evidence basis for an idea. Thus, we had a homeopathy article written with a sympathetic point of view on Citizendium. The chiropractors decamped there for awhile too.

I know cranks who disagree that the mass of the electron is approximately 1836 times the mass of the proton, believing instead that an electron is massless. In a perfectly "neutral" world, they would get a chance to hold court at length about such a ludicrous idea on a page like electron (T-H-L). Larry Sanger, if I understand his position, would have it that you wouldn't ever "take a side" as to whether the electron had mass or not.

Lather, rinse, repeat.

So it looks to me like he's climbing down the antivaxxer rabbit hole and seems comfortable with it just as others before him have climbed down intelligent design rabbit holes, global warming denial rabbit holes, homeopathy rabbit holes, and so forth.

[tarantino]

I know cranks who disagree that the mass of the electron is approximately 1836 times the mass of the proton,

You have that backwards :)

[Smiley]

Larry Sanger is the founding member of the cult of NPOV which used to hold considerable sway at critics sites as well as on Wikipedia generally (Cla68 is/was another acolyte as was The Devil's Advocate and Lar)

And Larry's big influence is/was Thomas Reid, founder of the Scottish School of Common Sense(!)

Sanger opened his dissertation with a quote from Reid:

...the natural faculties, by which we distinguish truth from error, are not fallacious.

Now I'm not a professional philosopher or anythink, but I'd venture that this is a somewhat anti-scientific sentiment.

Ironic that the author of Epistemic circularity: An essay on the problem of meta-justification may earn his footnote in history as the person responsible for citogenesis!

[iii]

I know cranks who disagree that the mass of the electron is approximately 1836 times the mass of the proton,

You have that backwards

O reciprocal! Thanks for the correction.

[Poetlister]

Larry Sanger is the founding member of the cult of NPOV which used to hold considerable sway at critics sites as well as on Wikipedia generally (Cla68 is/was another acolyte as was The Devil's Advocate and Lar). This kind of radical neutrality really only works when it comes to describing conflicts where there is no strong evidence or factual bases about which side is correct. It does not work when you are trying to explain the evidence basis for an idea. Thus, we had a homeopathy article written with a sympathetic point of view on Citizendium. The chiropractors decamped there for awhile too.

Fred Bauder had the idea that articles should always be sympathetic to their subject and anything adverse had to go in a separate "Criticisms of XX" article. Some people have used that as a ploy to further their POV.

[Vigilant]

Larry Sanger is the founding member of the cult of NPOV which used to hold considerable sway at critics sites as well as on Wikipedia generally (Cla68 is/was another acolyte as was The Devil's Advocate and Lar). This kind of radical neutrality really only works when it comes to describing conflicts where there is no strong evidence or factual bases about which side is correct. It does not work when you are trying to explain the evidence basis for an idea. Thus, we had a homeopathy article written with a sympathetic point of view on Citizendium. The chiropractors decamped there for awhile too.

Fred Bauder had the idea that articles should always be sympathetic to their subject and anything adverse had to go in a separate "Criticisms of XX" article. Some people have used that as a ploy to further their POV.

Fred Bauder is a disbarred and disgraced former attorney who tried to pressure a client into having sex with disgusting ass.

[Randy from Boise]

I know cranks who disagree that the mass of the electron is approximately 1836 times the mass of the proton,

You have that backwards

Now don't you go challenging his reality, you COI-drenched POV-pusher!!!

RfB

[Poetlister]

Fred Bauder had the idea that articles should always be sympathetic to their subject and anything adverse had to go in a separate "Criticisms of XX" article. Some people have used that as a ploy to further their POV.

Fred Bauder is a disbarred and disgraced former attorney who tried to pressure a client into having sex with disgusting ass.

Quite true, he's not exactly a shining paragon even among the Wikipedia cabal, but that doesn't have any bearing on what I said.

[Poetlister]

"Wikipedia Weaponization: A dissection of bias"

Sharyl Attkisson

[iii]

...many in the scientific community have not rejected a link between vaccines and autism; and some scientists support the concept of a link....

Etc.

Attkisson is doing herself no favors here. She is digging herself into a hole she will find a hard time getting out of. Incredibly, she has declared anyone who has ever been critical of her reporting on vaccines to be "conflicted", and seems unable to admit that some of her favorite sources are extremely problematic. (RFK Jr., e.g.?)

Competent lawyers would not let her sue, but if she were somehow able to file a lawsuit for libel, she would lose handily against any competent law firm on the basis of simple empirical facts. It is amazing, though sadly unsurprising, that she doesn't seem to understand this.

[Cla68]

This paragraph violates WP's SYN policy, and humorously, uses David Gorski's blog as a source. As everybody here likely knows, David Gorski is likely MastCell, a legacy WP editor and admin whose main motivation for his time-intensive participation on the site is to fight against ideas and theories about medical and health science that he doesn't agree with (or that his employers don't agree with).

[Poetlister]

...many in the scientific community have not rejected a link between vaccines and autism; and some scientists support the concept of a link....

Etc.

Attkisson is doing herself no favors here. She is digging herself into a hole she will find a hard time getting out of. Incredibly, she has declared anyone who has ever been critical of her reporting on vaccines to be "conflicted", and seems unable to admit that some of her favorite sources are extremely problematic. (RFK Jr., e.g.?)

Competent lawyers would not let her sue, but if she were somehow able to file a lawsuit for libel, she would lose handily against any competent law firm on the basis of simple empirical facts. It is amazing, though sadly unsurprising, that she doesn't seem to understand this.

This is not wildly different from climate change deniers. You can find sources that reject the consensus on the responsibility of humans for climate change and indeed for even the existence of climate change. That proves very little other than that you will never get 100% agreement on anything.

[Poetlister]

This paragraph violates WP's SYN policy, and humorously, uses David Gorski's blog as a source. As everybody here likely knows, David Gorski is likely MastCell, a legacy WP editor and admin whose main motivation for his time-intensive participation on the site is to fight against ideas and theories about medical and health science that he doesn't agree with (or that his employers don't agree with).

There are helpful [verification needed] and [disputed – discuss] tags on that section.

[Cla68]

Because of Sharyl Attkisson's fairly high profile, I suspect that she gets special attention from the Defenders of True Medical Science in Wikipedia. MastCell/Gorski hasn't personally touched the article since 2015, but I would expect that he's active in whatever offsite forum that group uses to organize their efforts to save Western medicine via Wikipedia.

By the way, if she was to report the harassment by Gamalial to the WMF, citing the "Fram precedent" would Gamalial get a global ban? If she did and he doesn't, that might lead credence to the idea that Fram got special treatement because of his "victim's" personal connection to the WMF staff.

[tarantino]

Because of Sharyl Attkisson's fairly high profile, I suspect that she gets special attention from the Defenders of True Medical Science in Wikipedia. MastCell/Gorski hasn't personally touched the article since 2015, but I would expect that he's active in whatever offsite forum that group uses to organize their efforts to save Western medicine via Wikipedia.

I've been through MastCell's edits and have mentioned this before. He isn't Gorski. He made this edit, which years ago had a reverse DNS of IBM in North Carolina. I've also found him editing from Madison WI and Sacramento. I checked Gorski's posts and schedules on the dates those edits were made. He wasn't anywhere near those locations.

[eagle]

linkhttps://sharylattkisson.com/2019/06/the ... oject-wcp/[/link]
The "Wikipedia Correction Project" is about to launch in conjuction with Everipedia.org:

Are Wikipedia’s agenda editors keeping you from making edits to correct disinformation and false information?

I’m pleased to announced the Wikipedia Correction Project, or WCP.

It’s an informal way to invite people to correct or explain alleged bias and fact errors on Wikipedia pages.
The goal is to make additional information that is censored on Wikipedia available elsewhere. Consumers will have the opportunity to compare versions of the information, if they wish, and make up their own mind.

Submissions open July 10, 2019.

[Vigilant]

linkhttps://sharylattkisson.com/2019/06/the ... oject-wcp/[/link]
The "Wikipedia Correction Project" is about to launch in conjuction with Everipedia.org:

Are Wikipedia’s agenda editors keeping you from making edits to correct disinformation and false information?

I’m pleased to announced the Wikipedia Correction Project, or WCP.

It’s an informal way to invite people to correct or explain alleged bias and fact errors on Wikipedia pages.
The goal is to make additional information that is censored on Wikipedia available elsewhere. Consumers will have the opportunity to compare versions of the information, if they wish, and make up their own mind.

Submissions open July 10, 2019.

Here's a chance for Another Boring Diatribe and the Swivel Eyed Loon to get such much needed airtime!

[Poetlister]

Would Abd have much sympathy for her views? TDA must be a better fit.