The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© 2021 AFPWikipedia editor 'warriors' fight lies, bigotry and even Nazis
By Joshua MELVIN WASHINGTON©2025 GPlusMedia Inc.
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© 2021 AFP
26 Comments
Login to comment
Blacklabel
Pop up- “Nazi fighter: Wikipedia” achievement has been unlocked.”
Zaphod
Totally non-biased headline, isnt it.... Larry Sanger, co-founder of Wiki, has a different opinion about the political bias of the current WIki editors.
n1k1
I read wiki a lot. I love it. These people are the heroes of our age.
WilliB
n1k1
I use Wiki too, but I am aware of their bias and figure that in when controversial topics are involved. Do you?
M3M3M3
I've read about this Coffman women elsewhere. She goes around trying to delete all personal histories and service records of German WW2 fighter and tank aces. She claims none of it is properly sourced according to this or that Wikipedia rule. Many people consider her to be a ideologically motivated vandal.
Ego Sum Lux Mundi
It is purely out of ethno-religious spite on the part of that Coffman woman. Wikipedia is a joke.
Paul
This is why I annually donate money to Wikipedia, it is the greatest free and independent source of information that mankind has ever known or will know!!!
Ubesh
Wikipedia has a very strong left-leaning bias and its centred on the English-speaking Anglo-saxon world.
lincolnman
Interesting the MAGA-warriors here disparaging another news source - the far-right media has them manipulated to believe only the MAGA-truth....all the others are edited by Hillary, Obama, and Hugo Chavez...
MAGA-truth is where Fox news talking heads rail against the vaccine and mandates, while working for a company that has vaccine and mask mandates...
https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-business-health-arts-and-entertainment-fox-corp-26096a8781c7c7f1d6c0ddff98a5fe6d
Then they fleece them with books and premium memberships...
One con-job after another...
Blacklabel
Sure, because these types of volunteers want to make sure "their" viewpoint is displayed as the accepted one.
Obviously.
Would you volunteer your time to be a moderator/editor just to ensure that people who have different opinions than you can speak freely? Its a power trip and narrative control for the masses, in the case of Wikipedia.
kurisupisu
….
Maybe it is because German heroes were glorified ?
During wars, fighters are glorified and the German people had a right to do so.
Of course, there is also the argument that the 1940’s regime was despicable but the issue of ‘glorification’ is markedly different
Alfie Noakes
https://slate.com/technology/2021/03/japanese-wikipedia-misinformation-non-english-editions.html
It's not just in the English-language Wikipedia that the past is being rewritten by fascists.
cla68
It’s very quick and easy to revert a Wikipedia article back to an earlier version. So, it means that Coffman and these other Internet activists are stuck in a Sysphusian trap of constantly watching those articles for the rest of their lives.
RichardPearce
Well, the 'warriors' certainly fight against any dissent from the US approved narrative, which is far from fighting against lies, bigotry, and the notion of national supremacy that underlay the Nazi ideology.
Indeed, occasionally, it involves, if not promoting those things, defending them.
ClippetyClop
American conservatives have reached their logical destination; they now embrace not only the people who imitate the Nazis but the actual original Nazis themselves. This is where right wing cults all end up.
ReynardFox
A claim is either sourced, or it isn’t. If it’s not, it’s removed. If it turns out a source for the claim is found, it can be re-added. That’s how it works. It’s not a perfect system, but requiring a citation is leaps and bounds better than you get elsewhere.
Could you imagine if Tucker Carlson was held to the same standards as Wikipedia? He’d be out of a job. Alex Jones is currently getting a legalistic full-fist colonoscopy for failing to clear even the pathetically low bar Wikipedia has set.
The fact that the right is making more unsourced claims than the left is, doesn’t mean there’s a political bias. It just means the right is wrong more often than the left. If a team loses 0-5, the scoring wasn’t ‘biased against them’; they’re just bad at sports.
William Bjornson
As a constant user of Wikipedia, the one place where Wikipedia falls down completely is in the 'Bios' of currently "important and influential" people which often are more fiction than fact and determinedly leave out ANY 'warts' that might otherwise draw legal criticism. Certain 'politically sensitive' topics, current and historical, are also highly slanted toward the political power of those about whom they are written. But, for 'fact based' descriptions of noncurrently 'relevent' events and people and, especially, pure historical and physical data, there is no greater resource on the internet. To give Power its, perhaps, undeserved due is our Human lot and Wikipedia is, above all, a Human endeavour and must, even in its editing, acknowledge that sad fact. Still, I send my USD100 every year because, despite its limitations, I must repeat that there is no single greater or more convenient resource for the thinking Human on the internet.
Strangerland
This whole discussion about cocaine only serves to illustrate just how ridiculous the American war on Drugs is, and has been for decades. What a joke.