Wikipedia bans Church of Scientology
And proves why Wikipedia should not separate the content from the creator in it’s presentation.
Granted, the Church of Scientology is especially ruthless in its PR efforts to revise opinions of its organization. But this slippery slope leads to organizations like the Catholic Church and governments fighting wars over perception (I believe the page on the Israeli/Palestine conflict is still locked down for this very reason.) Granted, I think we have some time before the Pope starts twittering and adjusting the entry on Darwin. (“RT @christ love not lest ye be loved.”)
All this could be solved if Wikipedia hadn’t emulated the Brittanica in one very crucial way: they maintained an “objective” point of view. In doing this, they wasted the greatest asset a collaborative, digital encyclopedia could have, the manipulation of content/”truth” based on the person writing it. Such a site based on viewpoints would be fascinating and valuable.
