http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Is_Wikipedia_an_experiment_in_anarchy

short version: almost, but not quite, entirely

12/31/2008 3:33:15 AM

if so, it shows us that people are bound and determined to filter into useless faith-based subgroups even in the face of wide open choice, anonymity, and freedom

see: the christian and muslim groups that basically wall up their holy entries and will have your changes reverted back in a matter of seconds if you fuck around with their canon

12/31/2008 3:36:47 AM

I must admit I never thought of Wikipedia as an experiment in anarchy, though the word "anarchy" has almost certainly been spoken by me to describe it. It is, at the very least and by one of the creator's own admissions, an experiment in purposeful anarchy. I suppose ultimately it can be dismissed as an instance of the "philospher-king", but I wish it were more true to the spirit of anarchy so that concrete conclusions could be drawn.

Largely I have found Wikipedia to maintain neutrality, or even to present prominently disruptive views, on controversial topics. I've even had to correct a few of the extraordinary claims regarding some of my own areas of interest, as they went far beyond anything the cited sources could support, though I did agree with them in spirit. To be fair, I don't often read up on Christianity, as between World History and a couple readings of the bible I've had my fill

12/31/2008 4:32:46 AM