Comments

Scope: introductory section only. The introduction is well referenced, but that should not be confused with being well balanced. Its central problem is the title-to-content mismatch. An article called simply “Yahweh” overwhelmingly presents Yahweh as a reconstructed ancient Near Eastern deity: one god among others, later merged with El, and eventually transformed into the sole God of Judaism. That

His life work and reputation had been besmirched by some random person on the internet; but I was left with the impression (which I have to the day) that he was never really all that bothered by that. He was bothered, rather, that the system had been set up in such an irresponsible way.

This review focuses on the lede both because I wished to get into some depth and because, having dismantled the lede, giving the same treatment to the rest seemed like a poor use of time. The first criticism I have is about the title. “Unmoved mover” doubtless deserves an article, but between this, “prime mover,” and either “Unmoved Mover Argument” or “Prime Mover Argument,” I would choose “Prime

This is a disambiguation page—a stub category serving a narrow, structural function: directing readers searching “Tim Chambers” to the correct person. It lists three individuals and provides minimal contextual description. Structure & Completeness The page appropriately identifies three distinct people: - Timothy Chambers (philosopher) - Tim Chambers (baseball) with years (1965–2019) and occupatio

Ever since the war, dishonest historians, known as revisionists, have attempted to reframe it as a simple conflict among European nation states, or business as usual for the Great Powers seeking to expand their empires. They have achieved their goal on Wikipedia, where the World War II article focuses on diplomacy and battles to the detriment of everything else.

I give this article an overall F grade because it contains circular definitions, obvious self-contradictions and negative bias. 1: Circular definition: The lead of the article defines a conspiracy theory as “an explanation for an event or situation that asserts the existence of a conspiracy (generally by powerful sinister groups, often political in motivation), when other explanations are more pro

To fit in a tweet, I only have space to say that my edit back in April to add Ghanian history is yet to be challenged. Kudos twees!

Even in long, detailed articles like this, Wikipedia routinely gets a lot of minor things wrong. Avoiding errors of the sort catalogued above requires great attention to detail. Wikipedians are perfectly content to let falsehoods and misleading implications sit if they fit the overall narrative and impression they want the reader to have about a subject.

First things first: her name is Anni Hindocha. Not Dewani. The Wikipedia article “The Murder of Anni Dewani” violates virtually every one of Wikipedia’s ostensible editorial standards. It violates neutrality; it violates consensus based editing; it violates conflict of interest prohibitions. Multiple courts have ruled Anni Hindocha’s murder was a premeditated contract killing staged to appear as a