Wikispooks: Intelligence for the 'little people' - there is a problem - wikipedia vs. wikispooks

Source: Wikispooks

WikiSpooks:The Problem with Wikipedia

WikiSpooks does NOT aspire to rival Wikipedia in either size or scope of content. Wikipedia is, without question, a massively successful and valuable reference work-in-progress. Its openness, moderated by carefully thought-out rules of article composition, content and standard, guarantees that it is ALWAYS worth consulting on almost ANY subject where introductory knowledge is being sought. Even in the WikiSpooks domain of potentially sensitive Deep Political issues, Wikipedia articles are often a goldmine of information and useful links - The series of articles on MKULTRA[1] (The covert and illegal CIA human mind-control research program) are a good case in point. BUT - there is a problem......

WikiSpooks is a collaborative project aimed at building a comprehensive reference source of deep political structures and events, together with the people and organisations connected to them.

The purpose of WikiSpooks is to build a repository of documents about deep political structures and events, together with development of the information they contain through user contributed articles, additions, edits and discussion. Emphasis is on the period from about 150 years ago to the present, although analysis of events in earlier times, by way of illustration and understanding of how deep politics operates, is encouraged.

The problem

It is WikiSpook's contention that, to the extent that a particular subject is judged threatening to established power centres and widespread acceptance of their 'official narrative' of events, the reliability and ultimate accuracy of Wikipedia articles touching on it is likely to be compromised. At the extremes of power and perceived threat, Wikipedia's 'Neutral-Point-of-View' principle pretty much guarantees that the compromise will be fundamental. See WikiSpooks Editorial Policy for a fuller discussion.

The quality of the Wikipedia MKULTRA articles clearly owes much to the exposure of the program in the early 1970's followed by both Congressional (The Church Commission) and Presidential investigations - plus the release of much previously classified material in 1977 - all of which assist in nudging Wikipedia's 'Neutral Point of View' that much closer to the truth of the matter.