wikipedia deletes entry for sarah root.

remember last year when trump invoked the story of sarah root to add gravitas to his position on immigration?

www.washingtonpost.com...

www.breitbart.com... let-us-down/

some editor at wikipedia really dislikes that and wishes this woman never existed and has gone on to delete the article about her on not only wikipedia but also all other wiki projects.

heres a link to the defunct entry: en.wikipedia.org...

it was deleted on jan 29th.

a reply to: snarfbot

and ???????????????

younng woman is killed in RTC

why does that make her " wiki worthy " ??????????????????

a reply to: ignorant_ape

i dont think the circumstances of her death would be considered routine by any reasonable person.

You know anyone can edit Wikipedia and they don’t “represent” Wikipedia right?

Nor does the articles existence actually... you know, affect antything

so whats the harm in there being an article for her? its no big deal why delete it. anyone can edit wikipedia true but their edits will be reviewed by the wikipedia staff, whom have their own axes to grind it seems. they accept input from anyone on whether an article should be deleted or not, but the decision still belongs to them, i think they vote.

originally posted by: eNumbra
You know anyone can edit Wikipedia and they don’t “represent” Wikipedia right?

Nor does the articles existence actually... you know, affect antything

False. Not "anyone" can get on wiki and edit. That honor is only granted to a select few who either pay enough in donations, or to those the wiki gods deem fit (those who agree to do as wiki says).

Don't believe me? Go try to edit something and get back to us.

Eta: I do miss the days we all had permission to edit. The tallest building in the world was "my d***" for about a month straight at one point....

Realizing I may be partially to blame for the global ban hammer. Apologies

a reply to: snarfbot

Around 40,000 people die a year in the US alone, from tragic random car accidents... I doubt Wikipedia even has the capability to have a page on every single individual who dies in a car crash.

Though, maybe there should be a Wikipedia article on how Trump capitalized off the devastation of this poor family and used the random death of this young women as a political football, to push his racist & bigoted political policies.

originally posted by: snarfbot
so whats the harm in there being an article for her? its no big deal why delete it. anyone can edit wikipedia true but their edits will be reviewed by the wikipedia staff, whom have their own axes to grind it seems. they accept input from anyone on whether an article should be deleted or not, but the decision still belongs to them, i think they vote.

So maybe it went unnoticed? Have you tried bringing this to Wikipedia’s attention?

a reply to: snarfbot

I will tell you from experience with my liberal sister who was a wiki staff member in charge of deleting /checking the new edits. They can do whatever their personal or professional agenda dictates.

The only balance comes from another person in charge of checking the staff who probably hired them based off a preferred "enabling" background or outright bias anyways.

IMO,

The government employs people to GET HIRED and installed in various industries into leadership positions for important companies /businesses therein. Its a domestic spy network.

Why wouldnt they be involved in wiki "nuts and bolts" if it benefits them? Its an established leader of its industry!

originally posted by: seaswine

originally posted by: eNumbra
You know anyone can edit Wikipedia and they don’t “represent” Wikipedia right?

Nor does the articles existence actually... you know, affect antything

False. Not "anyone" can get on wiki and edit. That honor is only granted to a select few who either pay enough in donations, or to those the wiki gods deem fit (those who agree to do as wiki says).

Don't believe me? Go try to edit something and get back to us.

Eta: I do miss the days we all had permission to edit. The tallest building in the world was "my d***" for about a month straight at one point....

Realizing I may be partially to blame for the global ban hammer. Apologies

Wiki having people to verify edits (while they may or may not have an agenda) doesn’t mean anyone can’t edit. Unless you’ve been banned which it sounds like you have and probably earned, you can edit with or without being logged it.

a reply to: eNumbra

i did the talk page associated with it was also deleted. after doing some digging it turns out it was nominated for deletion and was given 8 days for review, its not like this thing is advertised. and 2 people popped in supporting the deletion and like that its gone.

a reply to: seaswine
Don't worry, somebody later changed it to 'el negro de wasap' ....

originally posted by: snarfbot
a reply to: eNumbra

i did the talk page associated with it was also deleted. after doing some digging it turns out it was nominated for deletion and was given 8 days for review, its not like this thing is advertised. and 2 people popped in supporting the deletion and like that its gone.

web.archive.org... / en.wikipedia.org...
Copy and paste the first, remove the space after the slash and copy and paste the second, I can’t get it to link properly here.

Might be able to find the talk page via web.archive as well.

Link may not be formatting right, on my phone, give me a bit

But you can't wash her from the internet:
In a congressional testimony in April 2016, Root’s mother said:

Eswin spent four days in jail and is believed to have fled the country. He posted $5,000 bond, which was less than the cost it was to bury my daughter Sarah.

Judging by the publicity surrounding this woman, it is probable that her Wiki entry has been removed due to abuse. Sadly, internet abuse is a scourge of our time. Abuse and the fact her family just did not want her to be remembered in the way she has been held up in the public's eye.

originally posted by: seaswine

originally posted by: eNumbra
You know anyone can edit Wikipedia and they don’t “represent” Wikipedia right?

Nor does the articles existence actually... you know, affect antything

False. Not "anyone" can get on wiki and edit. That honor is only granted to a select few who either pay enough in donations, or to those the wiki gods deem fit (those who agree to do as wiki says).

Don't believe me? Go try to edit something and get back to us.

Eta: I do miss the days we all had permission to edit. The tallest building in the world was "my d***" for about a month straight at one point....

Realizing I may be partially to blame for the global ban hammer. Apologies

don't feel bad I got an entire ip range banned from wiki quote.

en.wikipedia.org... /wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sarah_Root

Seems it was deleted because her only notability is as a lightning rod for immigration issues, i.e. not a figure of any prominence.

Take it as you will.


Ugh, I don’t know if it’s ATS or just Wikis urls but this is obnoxious.

Elian Gonzalez has a nice long page.


en.m.wikipedia.org...án_González

Wikispeak:

‘Lightning Rod’ = ‘ political position I oppose ‘

originally posted by: SocratesJohnson

‘Lightning Rod’ = ‘ political position I oppose ‘

Don’t presume to know me.

a reply to: snarfbot

Yeah...Wiki isnt reality. User submitted content...until corrected or added to or deleted. I smirk when someone quotes "Here's what Wikipedia says about...."*

*P.S. Wiki DOES have 800 or so mods apparently...but...thats according to THEM! Any user generated content anyone can post is only so much in truth....

"YouTube" and it's channels is another one....but admittedly...its what we all use as sources or for entertainment.