Difference between revisions of "Wikispooks:About"
(Fix link and text) |
(Improve text) |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
The term 'Spooks' is an anglicisation of the Dutch word for 'Ghosts', used colloquially as a synonym for 'Spies' (as for example in the BBC series 'Spooks' <ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spooks BBC television series 'Spooks']</ref>). So far as WikiSpooks is concerned, both meanings are apposite. Historically, it is often only the ghosts of deep political motivations that remain once the official narrative has been anointed as fact by relentless repetition and the passage of time - the Gunpowder Plot of 1605 in England is a solid example. As for the 'Spies' meaning; anyone who studies deep political events for long is bound to conclude that Secret Intelligence Services are ALWAYS deeply involved one way or another and more often than not as puppet-masters. | The term 'Spooks' is an anglicisation of the Dutch word for 'Ghosts', used colloquially as a synonym for 'Spies' (as for example in the BBC series 'Spooks' <ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spooks BBC television series 'Spooks']</ref>). So far as WikiSpooks is concerned, both meanings are apposite. Historically, it is often only the ghosts of deep political motivations that remain once the official narrative has been anointed as fact by relentless repetition and the passage of time - the Gunpowder Plot of 1605 in England is a solid example. As for the 'Spies' meaning; anyone who studies deep political events for long is bound to conclude that Secret Intelligence Services are ALWAYS deeply involved one way or another and more often than not as puppet-masters. | ||
| − | So, after Wiki-This and Wiki-that, This-Wiki and That-Wiki - '''WikiSpooks it is. | + | So, after Wiki-This and Wiki-that, This-Wiki and That-Wiki - '''WikiSpooks''' '' it is.'' |
=== Language === | === Language === | ||
The site is English Language only for now. The MediaWiki platform has comprehensive multi-language facilities but operating them effectively uses both scarce resources and currently unavailable language resources. In other words "English-only" is a resources issue. It does mean that Non-English language documents and articles are not suitable candidates for the site unless competently translated and applicable to the English-speaking world. It is acknowledged that this does restrict the site's scope. | The site is English Language only for now. The MediaWiki platform has comprehensive multi-language facilities but operating them effectively uses both scarce resources and currently unavailable language resources. In other words "English-only" is a resources issue. It does mean that Non-English language documents and articles are not suitable candidates for the site unless competently translated and applicable to the English-speaking world. It is acknowledged that this does restrict the site's scope. | ||
| − | ==What Is | + | ==What Is The Problem With Wikipedia?== |
{{FA|WikiSpooks:Problems with Wikipedia}} | {{FA|WikiSpooks:Problems with Wikipedia}} | ||
| − | There are many examples where [[Wikipedia]] does a | + | There are many examples where [[Wikipedia]] does a good job of marshaling facts relevant to [[deep politics]]. However, its editorial policies, in keeping with the {{ccm}} in general mean that analysis is rarely more than superficial in the sense that '''the Sun must always be represented as revolving around the Earth''' per the example of Gallileo's dispute with the Authorities of the day over 'Heliocentrism' <ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei Wikipedia article - Heliocentrism]</ref>. |
The "Gunpowder Plot" of 1605 in England is a good illustration of marshaling copious undisputed facts but nonetheless missing or minimising what is clearly a higher probability interpretation of the episode than "the {{on}}". Popular perception of that event remains consonant with the "official narrative" which has it that the good brave authorities were caught off-guard by a dastardly Popish conspiracy to blow up Parliament whilst in session, and that the plot was uncovered and foiled in the nick of time - ''sound familiar?'' That is also the way it is presented in the Wikipedia main article <ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunpowder_Plot Wikipedia main article on The Gunpowder Plot of 1605]</ref> on the subject, where accusations of 'State conspiracy' are relegated to a single paragraph and copious evidence of agent-provocateuring and facilitating by the authorities of the day do not even warrant a mention. | The "Gunpowder Plot" of 1605 in England is a good illustration of marshaling copious undisputed facts but nonetheless missing or minimising what is clearly a higher probability interpretation of the episode than "the {{on}}". Popular perception of that event remains consonant with the "official narrative" which has it that the good brave authorities were caught off-guard by a dastardly Popish conspiracy to blow up Parliament whilst in session, and that the plot was uncovered and foiled in the nick of time - ''sound familiar?'' That is also the way it is presented in the Wikipedia main article <ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunpowder_Plot Wikipedia main article on The Gunpowder Plot of 1605]</ref> on the subject, where accusations of 'State conspiracy' are relegated to a single paragraph and copious evidence of agent-provocateuring and facilitating by the authorities of the day do not even warrant a mention. | ||
| − | == | + | == Editorial Policy == |
{{FA|WikiSpooks:Editorial Policy}} | {{FA|WikiSpooks:Editorial Policy}} | ||
The fundamental premise of WikiSpooks' editorial policy is that anything deemed a threat to '''Authority''' is generally successfully opposed by that authority because of the vastly greater resources which authority can bring to bear. This power imbalance becomes especially acute where matters of [[Deep Politics]] are involved. A good reference source on this syndrome in action is the small media-monitoring site ''Media Lens''.<ref>[http://www.medialens.org/ Media Lens media monitoring site]</ref> | The fundamental premise of WikiSpooks' editorial policy is that anything deemed a threat to '''Authority''' is generally successfully opposed by that authority because of the vastly greater resources which authority can bring to bear. This power imbalance becomes especially acute where matters of [[Deep Politics]] are involved. A good reference source on this syndrome in action is the small media-monitoring site ''Media Lens''.<ref>[http://www.medialens.org/ Media Lens media monitoring site]</ref> | ||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
== Acknowledgements == | == Acknowledgements == | ||
| − | {{FA| | + | {{FA|Wikispooks:Acknowledgements}} |
| − | The site uses [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki MediaWiki] | + | The site uses the MediaWiki software<ref>[http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki MediaWiki on MediaWiki]</ref> developed for [[Wikipedia]]. It is inspired and informed by several other open source collaborative projects, and is inspired by [[Cryptome]], [[Wikileaks]], [[Deep Politics Forum|The Deep Politics Forum]], [[SpinProfiles]], [[SourceWatch]] and last but not least, [[Wikipedia]]. |
== Site Owner == | == Site Owner == | ||
Revision as of 17:59, 25 November 2013
Contents
Site Rationale
- Full article: Wikispooks:Site Rationale
- Full article: Wikispooks:Site Rationale
WikiSpooks is an open source encyclopedia of deep politics, a repository of documents and information about deep political events and organisations. It compiles user contributed information to help people pursue alternatuve lines of research and explore ideas and opinions generally not explored in commercially-controlled media. Most of the content is from the last century or two. Analysis of historical events from earlier times is particularly welcome especially when it sheds light on the hidden purposes and practices of contemporary deep politics.
Naming
WikiSpooks acknowledges a certain plagiarism of both 'Wikipedia' and 'WikiLeaks' - but we're sure they can live with it. 'Wiki' - something, has become a sort of naming convention for many successful wiki-based projects, notably the Wikimedia Foundation [1] sites and WikiSpooks seeks to emulate that success.
The term 'Spooks' is an anglicisation of the Dutch word for 'Ghosts', used colloquially as a synonym for 'Spies' (as for example in the BBC series 'Spooks' [2]). So far as WikiSpooks is concerned, both meanings are apposite. Historically, it is often only the ghosts of deep political motivations that remain once the official narrative has been anointed as fact by relentless repetition and the passage of time - the Gunpowder Plot of 1605 in England is a solid example. As for the 'Spies' meaning; anyone who studies deep political events for long is bound to conclude that Secret Intelligence Services are ALWAYS deeply involved one way or another and more often than not as puppet-masters.
So, after Wiki-This and Wiki-that, This-Wiki and That-Wiki - WikiSpooks it is.
Language
The site is English Language only for now. The MediaWiki platform has comprehensive multi-language facilities but operating them effectively uses both scarce resources and currently unavailable language resources. In other words "English-only" is a resources issue. It does mean that Non-English language documents and articles are not suitable candidates for the site unless competently translated and applicable to the English-speaking world. It is acknowledged that this does restrict the site's scope.
What Is The Problem With Wikipedia?
- Full article: WikiSpooks:Problems with Wikipedia
- Full article: WikiSpooks:Problems with Wikipedia
There are many examples where Wikipedia does a good job of marshaling facts relevant to deep politics. However, its editorial policies, in keeping with the commercially-controlled media in general mean that analysis is rarely more than superficial in the sense that the Sun must always be represented as revolving around the Earth per the example of Gallileo's dispute with the Authorities of the day over 'Heliocentrism' [3].
The "Gunpowder Plot" of 1605 in England is a good illustration of marshaling copious undisputed facts but nonetheless missing or minimising what is clearly a higher probability interpretation of the episode than "the official narrative". Popular perception of that event remains consonant with the "official narrative" which has it that the good brave authorities were caught off-guard by a dastardly Popish conspiracy to blow up Parliament whilst in session, and that the plot was uncovered and foiled in the nick of time - sound familiar? That is also the way it is presented in the Wikipedia main article [4] on the subject, where accusations of 'State conspiracy' are relegated to a single paragraph and copious evidence of agent-provocateuring and facilitating by the authorities of the day do not even warrant a mention.
Editorial Policy
- Full article: WikiSpooks:Editorial Policy
- Full article: WikiSpooks:Editorial Policy
The fundamental premise of WikiSpooks' editorial policy is that anything deemed a threat to Authority is generally successfully opposed by that authority because of the vastly greater resources which authority can bring to bear. This power imbalance becomes especially acute where matters of Deep Politics are involved. A good reference source on this syndrome in action is the small media-monitoring site Media Lens.[5]
Although many articles on WikiSpooks use corresponding Wikipedia articles as their starting point, the fundamentally different guidelines of Wikispooks do not aim for a (status quo friendly) Neutral Point of View[6] and do not assume that presentation by the commercially-controlled media of evidence to be any special indication of its reliability. Template:Ep
Acknowledgements
- Full article: Wikispooks:Acknowledgements
- Full article: Wikispooks:Acknowledgements
The site uses the MediaWiki software[7] developed for Wikipedia. It is inspired and informed by several other open source collaborative projects, and is inspired by Cryptome, Wikileaks, The Deep Politics Forum, SpinProfiles, SourceWatch and last but not least, Wikipedia.
Site Owner
The owner of WikiSpooks is Peter Presland and the site is hosted in the Irish Republic.
