Collecting information

Hi, all users in the 9/11 Conspiracies Discussion Forum.

As all of you know much more about than what I do, the topic of 9/11 is one of the biggest within the conspiracy theory community, to call it that. The facts about the attacks are important to get clarified for very many people who don't agree that this disturbing and very fateful event in history has been totally explained. This forum is about precisely that, of course.

It was suggested to me that it could be a good idea to mention something here about another part of ATS (other than the forums): The ATS wiki is an attempt to create concise and easily available information about all the topics that the ATS forums are about. It has been pointed out that the 9/11 information in tinWiki could use some improvement. I have created a tinWiki Project page here for coordination of the improvement. The users here in the 9/11 forum are especially invited to help improve the mentioned wiki content. To read about some of the current problems with tinWiki's 9/11 information, visit this thread started by IsaacKoi.

Optimist

Hi Optimist....

I'm curious. What is then content going to be on that page? Will it be everything from Holograms to thermites? Space beams to Silverstein?

Will facts be allowed on the page? Links to real investigations? Peer reviewed papers? Links to debunking sites?

Thanks,

:TY:

[edit on 14-5-2008 by ThroatYogurt]

TY,

Thank you for replying. Well, the ATS wiki is supposed to contain information that is neutral and factual. Also, the focus of the encyclopedia wiki is the same as that in the ATS forums. That means that any kind of topic that is of general interest here in the forums, can be said to deserve its own page. Some topics, like the 9/11 topic, has several pages since it may be impractical to try and cram it all into just one page. Links to all sorts of relevant information is wanted in tinWiki articles, yes.

The guidelines and style manual say that information should be presented in a way that is verifiable and unbiased. This means that one can't claim something is the case that hasn't been proven. One can't say that space beams destroyed the towers, but one can, and indeed should, present the space beams theory, since it's part of the topic. Basically that means that, instead of saying space beams destroyed the towers, one should say that some people believe space beams destroyed the towers, and adding some elaboration on those theories, and also providing some links, is wanted, yes. Feel free to browse tinWiki's articles and pages, and, also, to look in the help sections.

Optimist


edit: spelling...

[edit on 14-5-2008 by Optimist]

reply to post by Optimist

---

Awesome Optimist. I like it. I will be sure to post some of the information I have accessed over my years of looking into the events of 911.

Great idea!

[edit on 14-5-2008 by ThroatYogurt]

TY,

I am happy to hear that. Some additional pointers regarding the 9/11 information in tinWiki: The initiative and idea that the information could need some improvement, is based on the state of the currently existing 9/11 articles. Some of the information in there may not quite live up to the requirements of the encyclopedia. Secondly, I wish to mention specifically that tinWiki is more about creating article text than about collecting article text -- basically what I mean by that is, you should look over the existing information, and then write original text to suit tinWiki's specific needs. tinWiki should not publish any article text or other material in a way that breaches copyrights. (Wikipedia content, and various other material, is legal to use if the source is named, but tinWiki generally should not get 'whole sale' pasting of content, but should preferably get original material that is suited to fit in the tinWiki context.) Also, just as important as adding new information, is editing and improving of the existing article text. If removing sections of text, it helps other users follow what goes on if some comment is posted in the given article's discussion about why material is deleted.

If you'd like to take a look at a little 'crash course' for tinWiki newbies, here's a short list of tips. And you can always ask other tinWiki users for help, tips and feedback, for example by posting in the tinWiki Project page discussion, or by posting directly on users' discussions (here's mine), or by using the tinWiki working forum. Remember that tinWiki is a collaborative project, and communication is always welcome.

Optimist


edit: spelling, and tiny rewrite of sentence for clarity...

[edit on 14-5-2008 by Optimist]

If anyone in this forum needs any help in trying to edit the currently existing 9/11 articles, or to try to create some new entries, just let me know.

It is easier to edit, or create, Tinwiki pages than you might think. In any event, if something goes wrong then any edits can quickly and easily be undone. So, you can't do much harm...

By the way, ATS tries to encourage the creation of new entries on the Tinwiki by various means - including awarding up to 10,000 points for a good entry (and sometimes even more...).

That's right - 10,000 points for a single entry!

Why not give it a go?

Optimist - I've starred and flagged your post in an attempt to draw some attention to it...

All the best,

Isaac

[edit on 15-5-2008 by IsaacKoi]

Here's some additional information for those here in 9/11 Conspiracies who might be interested in contributing to the ATS encyclopedia wiki. There are currently ten articles categorized as relating to 9/11. Additionally, there are seven articles categorized as relating to individuals challenging the official account of 9/11.

The former are:

• 9/11 Building 7
  
• 911 Ripple Effect
  
• Abdussattar Shaikh
  
• Flight 77
  
• Flight 93
  
• ISI
  
• Problems with official account of September 11 2001
  
• September 11 2001
  
• September 11 2001 timeline
  
• September Clues

And the latter are:

• Bob Bowman
  
• Mark Dice
  
• David Icke
  
• Martin Noakes
  
• Project for a New American Citizen
  
• Jeff Rense
  
• We are CHANGE

Please note that none of these articles exist purely because they relate to the attacks on September 11, 2001, or purely because they are high-quality articles. The articles exist because their topics relate to tinWiki's area of focus as an encyclopedia. A tinWiki article is, by definition, always a work in progress. (Articles can also be retitled, split up, or merged together, or even deleted altogether if for some reason the topic of a created article is considered to not belong in tinWiki.)

Regarding rewards of ATS points, which Isaac has mentioned, here's a quote from another thread, by Wiki Master William One Sac:



tinWiki has been around for about two years now. It's a fairly fun project to contribute to now and then and whenever you feel like it. It's possible to write in the website as a guest, or one can register -- which means one's username will be logged in the version history lists, instead of one's IP address being logged. Users also get their own user page, and personal discussion page. (Here's mine.) Feel free to ask questions if there's anything you're wondering about (regarding tinWiki :-) You can reply to this thread, send me a U2U, or post in my tinWiki user discussion.

tinWiki is itself still a work in progress, same as its articles, and improvements are indeed happening (little by little). The 9/11 articles are in many ways central in the conspiracy theory encyclopedia, and it's considered that you people here in 9/11 Conspiracies in ATS would be great to have contribute and improve the 9/11 information. Even, if someone has thoughts on the existing articles but isn't really motivated to do any editing, comments and feedback right here in thread would also be quite useful input.

I hope this post made some of you curious about writing in the ATS wiki, though, so here are some more links for those who consider looking into tinWiki:

• Main Page
  
• Community portal
  
• Help
  
• Project 9/11

Optimist


edited a link problem and a misspelling...

[edit on 20-5-2008 by Optimist]