[Ldsoss] wikipedia becoming anti-mormon?

[Charles Fry]

First of all, I think that you misrepresent the issue. This is not about the
Wikipedia itself taking an anti-mormon slant. It is about an imbalance in
contribution levels by those who have negative verses positive feelings
about the Church.

I think it is reasonable for any of us who stumble across incorrect articles
to correct them, and if we are strongly interested to subscribe to future
changes to keep an eye on them. And if there are enough interested parties,
there might be value gained from some internal organization. However I don't
feel that it would be appropriate for the Church to involve itself in
something like this.

Charles

On 4/2/07, Jesse Stay <jesse at thestays.org> wrote:
>
> I raised this question on the mormonapologetics.org forum recently,
> but it seems no one has a good answer on how to fix it.  I figure with
> this list having so many at church headquarters, and other smart
> people that have used wikipedia way more than I have, there might be
> some good ideas brought about here.
>
> My issue is it seems wikipedia is taking an anti-mormon slant lately.
> Some of the critical items that this Church is based on have now been
> seized by anti-Mormons to give an anti-Mormon slant to those topics.
> The main example I give is the topic "First Vision".  Wikipedia seems
> to mention account after account of the First Vision, almost to prove
> the 1838 account in our Pearl of Great Price is wrong, without any
> backing evidence to the contrary (look at fairwiki.org - there is
> plenty of backed evidence from actual sources to the contrary).
>
> One other example is the topic "Arianism".  Mormons are listed as
> supporters of Arius on wikipedia.  If you think we actually are, I
> highly suggest you research what Arius actually taught, as I really
> don't think we want ourselves in that category.  Were he to preach
> today I'm pretty sure we too would see him as a heretic as the early
> Christians did.  I tried to remove us myself from there, even
> including strong evidences and references as to why we shouldn't be
> included, but it promptly got put back in, with no good reference as
> to why we're included.
>
> So, my question is - does anyone have any good ideas how we as a
> community can fight back and get the *full* truth out there?  Is it
> worth our time?  Is this something the Church needs to attack from a
> higher level?  Are they aware of it?
>
> If this is one of those items that we should just ignore, I'm fine
> with it, but I figure this group would be as good as any to be put to
> use in fighting such tactics.  What are all of your thoughts?
>
> Jesse
>
> --
>
> #!/usr/bin/perl
> $^=q;@!>~|{>krw>yn{u<$$<Sn||n<|}j=<$$<Yn{u<Qjltn{ > 0gFzD gD, 00Fz,
> 0,,( 0hF 0g)F/=, 0> "L$/GEIFewe{,$/ 0C$~> "@=,m,|,(e 0.), 01,pnn,y{
> rw} >;,$0=q,$,,($_=$^)=~y,$/ C-~><@=\n\r,-~$:-u/
> #y,d,s,(\$.),$1,gee,print
> _______________________________________________
> Ldsoss mailing list
> Ldsoss at lists.ldsoss.org
> http://lists.ldsoss.org/mailman/listinfo/ldsoss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ldsoss.org/pipermail/ldsoss/attachments/20070402/bed3d361/attachment.htm