Posted on 12/08/2014 2:06:04 PM PST by rightistight
Wikipedia editors are intentionally scrubbing any criticism regarding Lena Dunham and her false accusations of rape against "Barry" during her time in college.
The concerted effort can be seen in multiple places; the most obvious, is Dunham's page itself, which has no mention of the controversy. But it is not because some lesser-users did not try to include Dunham's actions.
In the "history" section of "Not That Kind of Girl's" page, there are attempts to mention the controversy. Higher-ups, however, scrubbed these changes and reverted the page to its previous form.
Even changes saying that some have her claims have been "called into question" have deleted with prejudice, as this example shows:
(Excerpt) Read more at thepunditpress.com ...
Methinks a wiki raid is in order.
I almost have to admire Lena.
What other talentless slut no one ever heard of can suddenly make the news nonstop for weeks at a time?
Granted she is vilified from the Right AND the Left. But who cares? Its all about the publicity, right?
And this being the case - I nominate Lena Dunham as Time’s Person of the Year.
/barf
I am having a very difficult time reading or even making any sense of either version of the wiki posts. Any help out there?
The woman needs to be psyhcologically evaluated and perhaps committed for meanness of spirit and deed.
This is one of the reasons you can’t use wikipedia as a reference for anything vaguely controversial. For some things, it’s great. Earlier today I was looking up some information about private network addressing within IPv6. It had great info. I would never look to wikipedia for anything remotely political though.
Wikipedia recently scrubbed racial breakdown statistics of inmates at Rikers Island correctional facility in NYC, that were ... err... unflattering of people of color.
Agreed. The default position of Wikipedia in such cases is to carry the left’s narrative and consider anything to the contrary as “vandalism”.
A similar problem exists the Gamergate controversy, where truth (especially if it’s from Breitbart) has a very tough road to being accepted. Introducing narrative-shattering truth there immediately invites action to scrub it.
S A N D R A F L U K E
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.