tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post5683655333530011155..comments2024-03-21T00:42:18.535-07:00Comments on Koenraad Elst: The Wikipedia lemma on "Koenraad Elst": a textbook example of defamationKoenraad Elsthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02503713923882807510noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-14735713558066795812013-06-13T10:45:06.807-07:002013-06-13T10:45:06.807-07:00Sir,
It is a shame that wikipedia is behaving in t...Sir,<br />It is a shame that wikipedia is behaving in this fashion. Either they should get rid of their encyclopedia tag or change their ways.<br />Just read the article on 'moon landings', you can find the hoax theory being mentioned in it with the statement "some people insist that these landings are a hoax", but never bothers to give the names. This, in spite of the fact that all these hoax theories have been dismantled brick by brick by experts in physics. <br />At least they should take care while writing articles on persons who are alive, and , a nice hiding you've given them ! Karthikrajanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18171891264654103091noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-23706523243098001182013-06-09T04:18:11.717-07:002013-06-09T04:18:11.717-07:00Thanks for your contributions. The lemma has indee...Thanks for your contributions. The lemma has indeed been corrected. Not sufficiently, but very substantially.Koenraad Elsthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02503713923882807510noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-50824703444070148512013-06-08T10:54:37.812-07:002013-06-08T10:54:37.812-07:00There are many on wikipedia who specialize in atta...There are many on wikipedia who specialize in attacking and smearing pro-Hindus (Biographies of living people articles), like the wikipedia editors Dbachmann, Hornplease, Fowler&Fowler, Sitush and many more. <br /><br />I'd like to criticize one point in your (otherwise, and as always, excellent) article. These wikipedia contributors, at least not all of them, are not all leftists. For example the user Dbachmann likes to use leftist sources when they can be used to smear Hindus with allegations of facism/racism/nazism (i.e. he is "playing the race card", precisely that what he criticzes in Hindu (and African-American) editors), but in other areas in wikipedia his edits seem more right-wing (for example, he criticizes the leftist politician Cohn-Bendit, and he laments on the talkpage of Scientific racism that the latter is not anymore so accepted in mainstream society (at the same time, of course, he makes the dubious claim in the Wikipedia article on the history of Hinduism that modern Hinduism was influenced by “scientific racism”)).<br /><br />The most detailed article to the anti-Hindu bias on wikipedia is probably the one at the alt.politics.india Google Groups:<br />https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/alt.politics.india/j9kEYaZ7DrQAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-71667286227864114312013-05-30T15:29:33.294-07:002013-05-30T15:29:33.294-07:00Dear Mr. Elst,
I tried to edit your page by givi...Dear Mr. Elst,<br /><br /><br />I tried to edit your page by giving details citations. (Look at the current talk page). However someone reverted my changes without giving me any good reason to do so. <br /><br />So I escalated the matters to the admins via Quora. They did take a notice and cleaned it up to meet the basic Wikipedia guidelines. Even that basic clean up exercise seems to have cleaned up a lot of nonsense that was there. <br /><br />You biographical article is is currently queued up on their noticeboard and probably someone will clean it up even more later.<br /><br />Thanks<br />Akshar<br /><br />Aksharhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07505809516569994824noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-73733920803517116672013-05-27T07:07:06.166-07:002013-05-27T07:07:06.166-07:00Dear Dr Elst,
Could you mention some sources that...Dear Dr Elst,<br /><br />Could you mention some sources that discuss your work, so that they could be referenced and mentioned in the article? Wikipedia relies on what has been published about the subject in other sources, so without the support of the right sources it's hard to permanently improve the page in the right direction.displaynamehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09068351772472305473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-36442060020654853212013-05-23T18:01:48.080-07:002013-05-23T18:01:48.080-07:00Hmmm... Wiki. As Swamy Devananda mentioned, these ...Hmmm... Wiki. As Swamy Devananda mentioned, these Wiki editors are those who refused to correct the St. Thomas myth on wiki. They are the same who refused under various pretexts to keep out pages on greatest of people like Vasistha Ganapati Muni. They are the same editors who kept pages of calumny (for instance the saffron terror one) while suppressing information that is not so good for colonial masters.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02648297622462808782noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-11850236938524009792013-05-21T11:09:25.035-07:002013-05-21T11:09:25.035-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05435537303017946632noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-41950216183758205882013-05-21T11:08:47.305-07:002013-05-21T11:08:47.305-07:00I have read all of elst's writings on VOI and ...I have read all of elst's writings on VOI and find them very scholarly and informative.I can't believe that he is being slandered on Wikipedia. Slander and character assassination is a typical leftist WMD. Scholarly debate Is not their forte.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05435537303017946632noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-40260388245429783242013-05-20T22:36:36.661-07:002013-05-20T22:36:36.661-07:00I suppose you are right. The point of slander is n...I suppose you are right. The point of slander is not to enlighten but to do damage and it often does work.<br /><br />The good news is on the online front,you have tools to undo much of the damage- you can edit your wikipedia or urge well wishers to do so. And use SEO so that more friendly pages pop up first on google search.<br /><br />For traditional media, you may have to hire a PR firm or pull in favors from your friends in the media.ysv_raohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06078517736366792665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-21527032273955788862013-05-20T14:26:59.919-07:002013-05-20T14:26:59.919-07:00Employers are not into truth. To them it is not im...Employers are not into truth. To them it is not important whether Wikipedia is truthful or not. When they hear slander, they may even think that the slanderers are wron,g and I am right. All the same, they reason: this man means trouble if we associate with him, so we'd better avoid him. Slanderers don't care so much whether their slander is believed, they only care whether it conditions people's behaviour. And it does.Koenraad Elsthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02503713923882807510noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6138082354348831474.post-55720294462252186612013-05-20T11:56:47.787-07:002013-05-20T11:56:47.787-07:00Truth be told,I only glanced at your wikipedia pag...Truth be told,I only glanced at your wikipedia page to find some details of a book,otherwise I wouldve brought it to your attention In the meantime cant you edit it yourself?It is wikipedia after all!<br /><br />Are potential employers so foolish that they rely solely on google search when researching a writer who comments of controversial ideologies?<br />Surely they must anticipate slander and screen out the noise accordingly.<br />ysv_raohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06078517736366792665noreply@blogger.com