The following comes from an April 12 story on LifeNews.com.
Wikipedia, the online dictionary and research web site utilized by millions of people every day, is considering deleting the entry associated with Kermit Gosnell, the infamous abortion practitioner on trial for murder.
“This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia’s deletion policy,” a Wikipedia headline reads in red at the top of the Gosnell entry. “Please share your thoughts on the matter at this article’s entry on the Articles for deletion page.”
The Wikipedia note instructs its web site editors, “Feel free to edit the article, but the article must not be blanked, and this notice must not be removed, until the discussion is closed.”
Wikipedia’s deletion policy includes 14 reasons for deletion ranging from “2.Copyright violations and other material violating Wikipedia’s non-free content criteria” to “9.Articles that breach Wikipedia’s policy on biographies of living persons” to articles about hoaxes.
One of the reasons “this article is being considered for deletion?”
According to one Wikipedia editor, “His case has not received national attention. It is a local multiple-murder story in Pennsylvania, nothing more.”
“I think this page should be deleted for several reasons. First, it is about a living, alleged perpetrator. Per WP:BIO, “Editors must give serious consideration to not creating an article on an alleged perpetrator when no conviction is yet secured.” Second, this person does not meet other notability criteria. His case has not received national attention. It is a local multiple-murder story in Pennsylvania, nothing more,” the editor writes.
To potential that Wikipedia might delete the Gosnell entry created quite a stir on Twitter today.
“Huh. The Kermit Gosnell’s Wikipedia has been “considered for deletion”. Odd for one of the biggest mass murderers in US history,” wrote @PoliticalMath….
To read the entire story, click here.
Wikipedia is turning into a slow motion sucker punch. Time to duck.
The Pennsylvania Grand Jury ruled that Gosnell murdered hundreds of born children. But this news is being suppressed, in favor of the news of 20 children murdered by Lanza. Is there a single democrat politician or media executive who is not socio- or psychopathic?
When I looked at it, the first alert stated “This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.” That’s the whole point of Wikipedia: distributed review resulting in an article that doesn’t push one point of view over another. When it becomes obvious that you are pushing your point of view, any reader not inclined to that perspective instinctively pushes back by rejecting all your arguments, no matter how valid.
The article as it appears on April 15 is still a disturbing read, but it . All sides would do well to look at how a serious commitment to neutrality and sober reportage delivers the facts with a lot of punch. Notice the impact that simple photo delivers, showing the child’s body with the severed spinal cord. It would be even more effective if the article had a more “friendly” picture of Gosnell, rather than the mug shot.
I wonder how many people, who otherwise would never read anything having even a whiff of pro-life attitude, will be pulled toward a pro-life position, especially regarding late-term abortion? Measuring the effectiveness of pro-life literature by how it affects people who already identify with the movement is like measuring a medical treatment by how well it works for people who are healthy. The real measure of medicine ought to be how it works for sick people. Likewise, the real measure of pro-life literature ought to be how it affects people who are committed to pro-choice. This article is a great example and an opportunity to see directly how people from different perspectives process the facts.
The Gosnell “multiple murder” story is about as local as the Newtown murders of 27 children and adults as well as the hillside strangler was just a bunch of local murders. There is o reason why this story can’t contain a forewarning that it is in court and as yet no decision rendered, but he is the story .
I can’t express enough how I feel about this….wow is there no common decency anymore…especially for the innocent babies…how cold we have grown, how desensitized…..
Every ProLife activist in America knows about this mass murderer.
And there are millions of ProLifers who know about this guy, for longer than Wikepedia has known him.
Gosnell has been around a long time, and he has been know for a very long time. He is not new.
I will take my money elsewhere, I have donated to Wikipedia, but that will end if they take the story away from the public.
It will show that Wikipedia is not neutral !
[…] California Catholic Daily. (2013). Wikipedia might delete abortionist Kermit Gosnell. https://cal-catholic.com/wikipedia-might-delete-abortionist-kermit-gosnell/ […]