Whats Wrong With Wikipedia? Many of you will know that the Starchild Project has been struggling for years against the biased article about the Skull on Wikipedia. Anyone can edit Wikipedia, but edits can be reversed with one click of a mouse, and there are complex rules that can be interpreted to allow biased articles to be posted and defended by biased editors. We dont expect any special treatment and encourage debate, BUT we just dont understand why one negative article by Dr. Novella, a neurologist, is given more credibility than the report and many on the record statements of Dr. Ted Robinson, a highly qualified M.D. and craniofacial surgeon who has substantial experience with human cranial deformities. Dr. Novella, a vocal skeptic, has refused every opportunity we have offered him to examine the Starchild Skull in person, or to consider evidence such as CT scans that would bring into question his diagnosis of hydrocephaly. Dr. Robinson, on the other hand, was able to examine the real Skull for over a year, and to investigate it thoroughly with colleagues. Logically he would be the best source for accurate information about the Starchild Skull. Yet Wikipedias rules about reliable sources seem to allow them to dismiss everything Dr. Robinson says because we have published it on our website, and reference Dr. Novellas blog as the authority on the Skull. As far as Wikipedia is concerned, we, the worlds foremost Starchild Skull research body, are the LEAST qualified to give reliable information about it. Yet they are happy to accept research from other, more mainstream private organizations, and from other organizations that specialize in the topic they are being referenced on. The rules simply dont make sense, and they are not applied to everyone equally. Wikipedia articles are required by their rules to have a NPV, Neutral Point of View. Yet currently the article says things like Experts believe it to be the skull of a child who died as a result of known genetic or congenital abnormalities, such as congenital hydrocephalus. They dont say some experts or even Dr. Steven Novella, they say experts implying all experts, which is not only NOT neutral, it is NOT true. The Starchild Project has spent many fruitless hours changing the article only to have the edits reverted, not matter how closely we attempt to stick to their many rules. It is not fair, and we are not giving up. If you are an experienced Wikipedia editor, the Starchild Project needs your help. We believe that if enough people struggle to change this biased and inaccurate article, we will, eventually, prove that our evidence is valid and should be allowed as a reference. If you can help, please look at the article above about Debunking the Starchild Skull. In it, you will find references to Dr. Robinsons report, and to articles explaining why the Skull isnt Hydrocephaly or Progeria, the two most commonly used explanations on Wikipedia. Please use these references to change the article. Make sure you keep a copy of your changes so that if they are reverted you can copy/paste them back in quickly and easily. We need your help, and this costs nothing but a little of your time. Thank you! URL for Dr. Robinsons report stating that it was NOT cradleboarded, and did NOT have hydrocephaly: starchildproject/index.php?option=com_content&catid=2&id=44&view=article&Itemid=102
Posted on: Tue, 06 May 2014 04:00:01 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015