Difference between revisions of "Wikispooks:About"
(search image) |
(slightly sharper text and point to coverpage of top rated pages) |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
== Where to go next? == | == Where to go next? == | ||
{{FAs|WikiSpooks:FAQ|WikiSpooks:Glossary}} | {{FAs|WikiSpooks:FAQ|WikiSpooks:Glossary}} | ||
| − | + | The best way to see what we've got on a specific topic is to type keywords into the [[image:search_box.png|128px|alt=Search ⌕]] box in the top right corner of this page. To browse some of our best material, try this [[Main_Page#tab=_C2_A0Top_Rated|list of top-rated pages]]. For common queries, we have an {{WSLink|FAQ}}. If the language here is new to you, the {{WSLink|glossary}} might help - and should give you an idea of the sort of material here. If you have further questions, you could {{WSLink|contact}} a site administrator. | |
== Acknowledgements == | == Acknowledgements == | ||
Revision as of 07:39, 26 October 2016
WikiSpooks is an open licensed, open source encyclopedia of deep politics. We currently have 30,643 user-generated pages (13,414 people, 4,896 groups, 1,353 events... ) supplemented by a further 2,252 third party documents.
WikiSpooks was set up in 2010 to establish a collaborative space for the joint re-examination of recent history, focusing particularly on the last 60 years or so.[1] We are free to research people, events, groups and concepts not subject to much scrutiny by corporate media and as such, not tolerated in Wikipedia. Since official narratives do sometimes change, it follows that they are not always correct, and WikiSpooks provides assistance for those researching such possibilities.
Contents
Editorial Policy
- Full article: WikiSpooks:Editorial Policy
- Full article: WikiSpooks:Editorial Policy
The fundamental premise of WikiSpooks' editorial policy is that authority opposes anything which it perceives as a threat, and can bring greater resources to bear than are available to individuals or small groups. This power imbalance becomes especially acute where matters of deep politics are involved. For more on this, see Media Lens, a media-monitoring website.[2] Wikispooks therefore does not aim for a (status-quo friendly) Neutral Point of View[3] and noting that newspapers and broadcasters (like governments) can and do lie with impunity, it does not assume the commercially-controlled media's publication of evidence to be a reliable indication of its veracity.
What Is Wrong With Wikipedia?
- Full article:
Wikipedia/Problems
- Full article:
Wikipedia's editorial policies guarantee a blind spot around matters of deep politics, so information on such topics is superficial and fragmented at best and increasingly no more than a smokescreen. Its adherence to the official narrative as promulgated by establishment-friendly 'reliable sources' effectively means that, to use the astrolonomical analogy from Gallileo's time, "the heavens must always be represented as revolving around the earth".[4]
Where to go next?
- Full articles: WikiSpooks:FAQ, WikiSpooks:Glossary
- Full articles: WikiSpooks:FAQ, WikiSpooks:Glossary
The best way to see what we've got on a specific topic is to type keywords into the 
box in the top right corner of this page. To browse some of our best material, try this list of top-rated pages. For common queries, we have an FAQ. If the language here is new to you, the glossary might help - and should give you an idea of the sort of material here. If you have further questions, you could contact a site administrator.
Acknowledgements
- Full article: WikiSpooks:Acknowledgments
- Full article: WikiSpooks:Acknowledgments
Wikispooks is inspired and informed by several other open source collaborative projects, including Cryptome, Wikileaks, The Deep Politics Forum, SpinProfiles, SourceWatch and last but not least, that keeper of the official narrative on the internet, Wikipedia, with which it shares a common software platform, MediaWiki.[5]
References
| ||||||
|
