[Ldsoss] wikipedia becoming anti-mormon?

[Jesse Stay]

It appears that since I've posted this on this and a few forums, based
on the history, it's been changed several times today.  The last time
it was changed before that was March 23.  I think it's important we
keep watch of these Mormon-related articles, and as missionary work,
ensure they are distributing correct information.  So, the current
version may be more accurate now than it was before.  After work today
I'll go through and see if I can add as well if anything is still
needed.  I suggest everyone here watch these pages as well and be sure
inaccurate or missing doctrine isn't added (or taken away).  I think
for such a broad site as wikipedia, that is supposed to be unbiased,
it is our duty to be sure the entire truth is being made manifest.

Jesse

On 4/2/07, John M. Shaw <jshawut at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Jesse,
>
> As I read through the pages I felt that the page was very fair and pretty
> academically rigorous maintaining a civil tone (definetly not the tones of
> the ANTI-Groups).  I've read much of our own scholars analysis of the First
> Vision accounts and they seem to follow the same lines, seems to me like
> this could be right out of Richard Bushman writings if he did an analysis of
> the 1st Vision.
>
> -John
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Jesse Stay <jesse at thestays.org>
> To: LDS Open Source Software <ldsoss at lists.ldsoss.org>
> Sent: Sunday, April 1, 2007 11:46:52 PM
> Subject: [Ldsoss] wikipedia becoming anti-mormon?
>
> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ldsoss mailing list
> Ldsoss at lists.ldsoss.org
> http://lists.ldsoss.org/mailman/listinfo/ldsoss
>
>


-- 

#!/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