I try and give some credit to a Republican candidate and what do we get:
A good laugh was had by all in my clan, and my plan was to report the edits as unfounded and bias. However, a senior member came and reverted the revert (of the revert), as well as making substantive changes to improve the article. thereby remedying the entire situation. He removed commentary, improved citations and increased the readability of the article. Good for him!
Within the last 2 hours, BradyForIllinois came back in a reverted to their version, with this tag
(Tag: possible BLP issue or vandalism)
Huh? Possible vandalism? The [real] article now cites Brady’s platform (from his website no less), Chicago Tribune articles that discuss his history and general facts about the man. Yet, this is somehow an issue of…vandalism?
As an Illinois voter, I think it would be downright neat to know about my voting options. Taking on the Family Business is fine and dandy, but not exactly something I care about.I truly hope this is an issue of a campaign manager not understanding how the Internet is supposed to work, rather than an indication of what type of underhanded censorship will come about should this man become Governor.
What’s funny about this is Rebecca doesn’t appear to be terribly political in a partisan sense, but don’t mess with Wikipedia contributors who know the system. It’s a pretty strong ethos over there to the point I don’t edit articles because I don’t want to run afoul of the norms over there.
Via Capitol Fax
Hallo, great post, I will return here soon.