As I have proven previously, Jimmy (call me “Jimbo”) Donal Wales’ Wikipedia is BIASED, when it comes to the Burzynski Clinic Wikipedia article:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burzynski_Clinic
WikipediA or WikipediAin’t ?:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/05/16/wikipedia-or-wikipediaint/
Wikipedia, what’s your motivation?:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/05/02/wikipedia-whats-your-motivation/
I show JzG what a “FACT” is: Burzynski: FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions): Clinical Trial Results:
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/05/14/i-show-jzg-what-a-fact-is-burzynski-faq-frequently-asked-questions-clinical-trial-results/
guychapman (Guy Chapman) Critiquing “The Skeptic” Burzynski Critics: A Film Producer, A Cancer Doctor, And Their Critics (page 9):
https://stanislawrajmundburzynski.wordpress.com/2013/05/05/guychapman-guy-chapman-critiquing-the-skeptic-burzynski-critics-a-film-producer-a-cancer-doctor-and-their-critics-page-9/
12/26/2012 I requested that Wikipedia add the below Houston’s KPRC News article re Lola A. Quinlan, to the Burzynski Clinic Wikipedia article, considering that they had previously posted there:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burzynski_Clinic
Lawsuits
“In January 2012, Lola Quinlan, an elderly, stage IV cancer patient, sued Dr Burzynski…”
“Please add re WP:NPOV that Burzynski’s attorney, Richard Jaffe has disputed Lola Quinlan’s claims:
“On February 1, 2012, Dr. Burzynski’s attorney, Richard Jaffe, disputed Lola Quinlan’s allegations on Houston’s KPRC News.”
http://m.click2houston.com/news/Houston-cancer-doctor-draws-new-complaints-from-patients/-/16714936/8581480/-/hmrbjk/-/index.html
http://www.jag-lawfirm.com/burzynski-suit-kprc-02012012.html
Thank you very much.” Didymus Judas Thomas 15:03, 26 December 2012
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Burzynski_Clinic&diff=prev&oldid=529836971
So, what was Wikipedia’s NON-BIASED rational wiki reasoning for NOT including this Houston, Texas, news article reference?
Dear Didymus Judas Thomas,
The Wikipedia page Talk:Burzynski Clinic has been changed on
December 26, 2012 by Arthur Rubin
See
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Burzynski_Clinic&diff=next&oldid=529836971
to view this change.
Editor’s summary: /* Law Suits */ So?
Contact the editor:
mail: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:EmailUser/Arthur_Rubin
wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Arthur_Rubin
Arthur Rubin advised:
“:So? [OR] Disputing it in the media probably means he doesn’t have a case. [/OR] In any case, a lawyer disputing the allegations against his client is not even news.” — Arthur Rubin 15:24, 26 December 2012
I had the impression that Arthur Rubin had not even bothered to read the article in question, and replied:
“::Arthur Rubin, I’m not sure what relevance your above post has re WP:NPOV since the article includes statements from attorneys representing both sides.”. 17:51, 27 December 2012 Didymus Judas Thomas 12/27/2012
Arthur Rubin’s, and Jimmy (call me “Jimbo”) Donal Wales’ Wikipedia whiners’ response?
SILENCE
Well, you know the saying:
Silence IS Golden
(Wikipedia: Neutral Point of View)
WP:NPOV clearly indicates:
“Editing from a neutral point of view (NPOV) means representing FAIRLY, PROPORTIONATELY, and as far as possible WITHOUT BIAS, ALL significant views that have been published by reliable sources.”
Did Arthur Rubin, and Jimmy (call me “Jimbo”) Donal Wales’ Wikipedia whiners’ do this?
“ALL Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content MUST be written from a neutral point of view.”
Did Arthur Rubin, and Jimmy (call me “Jimbo”) Donal Wales’ Wikipedia whiners’ do this?
“NPOV is a fundamental principle of Wikipedia and of other Wikimedia projects.”
Did Arthur Rubin, and Jimmy (call me “Jimbo”) Donal Wales’ Wikipedia whiners’ do this?
“This policy is NONNEGOTIABLE and ALL editors and articles MUST follow it.”
Did Arthur Rubin, and Jimmy (call me “Jimbo”) Donal Wales’ Wikipedia whiners’ do this?
“The principles upon which this policy is based CANNOT be superseded by OTHER POLICIES or GUIDELINES, or by editors’ consensus.”
Did Arthur Rubin, and Jimmy (call me “Jimbo”) Donal Wales’ Wikipedia whiners’ do this?
(Words CAPITALIZED for emphasis only.).
“1 Explanation of the neutral point of view.”
“This page in a nutshell:”
“Articles mustn’t take sides, but should explain the sides, fairly and without bias.”
Did Arthur Rubin, and Jimmy (call me “Jimbo”) Donal Wales’ Wikipedia whiners’ do this?
“This applies to both what you say and how you say it.”
Did Arthur Rubin, and Jimmy (call me “Jimbo”) Donal Wales’ Wikipedia whiners’ do this?
“Editors, while naturally having their own points of view, should strive in good faith to provide complete information, and not to promote one particular point of view over another.”
Did Arthur Rubin, and Jimmy (call me “Jimbo”) Donal Wales’ Wikipedia whiners’ do this?
“As such, the neutral point of view does not mean exclusion of certain points of view, but including all notable and verifiable points of view.”.
Did Arthur Rubin, and Jimmy (call me “Jimbo”) Donal Wales’ Wikipedia whiners’ do this?
[[WP:NPOV]] “History of NPOV:” (Content # 6). “The relative prominence of each viewpoint among Wikipedia editors or the general public is not relevant and should not be considered.”
(Wikipedia: Simplified Ruleset)
[[WP:SR]] “Wikipedia does not have its own views, or determine what is “correct.”
Did Arthur Rubin, and Jimmy (call me “Jimbo”) Donal Wales’ Wikipedia whiners’ do this?
“Instead, editors try to summarize what good sources have said about ideas and information.”
Did Arthur Rubin, and Jimmy (call me “Jimbo”) Donal Wales’ Wikipedia whiners’ do this?
“Differing views are presented objectively and without bias as they are reported in reliable sources—sources that have a reputation for being accurate.”
Did Arthur Rubin, and Jimmy (call me “Jimbo”) Donal Wales’ Wikipedia whiners’ do this?
“Good sources are the base of the encyclopedia, and anyone must be able to realistically check whether contributions can be backed up by one.”.
Did Arthur Rubin, and Jimmy (call me “Jimbo”) Donal Wales’ Wikipedia whiners’ do this?
[[WP:NPOVFAQ]]
(Wikipedia: Neutral Point of View Frequently Asked Questions)
Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/FAQ
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/FAQ
[[WP:NPOVFAQ]]
See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias
[[WP:CSB]]
Did Arthur Rubin, and Jimmy (call me “Jimbo”) Donal Wales’ Wikipedia whiners’ do this?
Is Wikipedia’s Burzynski BIAS showing?
YOU decide, because in my opinion it IS, since this piece of “Yellow Journalism” is referenced in the Burzynski Clinic Wikipedia article:
2010 film, Burzynski – Cancer is Serious Business
“Prior to the debut of “Burzynski”, Houston Press correspondent Craig Malisow mocked the film’s lack of objectivity, characterizing it as “a puff-piece paean that cherrypicks facts and ignores any criticism”, and criticized the project for presenting only Burzynski’s side of the story.” [60]
60^ Malisow, Craig (2010-06-02). “Stanlislaw Burzynski: New Movie Proves He’s A Cancer-Fighting Giant – Houston News – Hair Balls”. Blogs.houstonpress.com. Retrieved 2011-11-25.
Jun 2, 2010 – Houston’s Stanislaw Burzynski, who sells a so-called cancer …
(Hair Balls hasn’t seen the movie, but nowhere in the … )
So, in a nutshell, Wikipedia will reference “Yellow Journalism” by a “Hack” who posts an article about a movie he has NOT even seen, but will NOT reference a news article which is posted on Lola A. Quinlan’s attorney’s web-site, which contains comments from her attorney, as well as Dr. Stanislaw R. Burzynski’s attorney
Wikipedia, your BIAS is showing
“The U.S. v. Article’~ court stated that the FDA’s responsibility was to protect the ultimate consumer, which included protection of “the ignorant, the unthinking and the credulous.”‘
“the ignorant
the unthinking and
the credulous.”‘
Arthur Rubin, and Jimmy (call me “Jimbo”) Donal Wales’ Wikipedia whiners’, which are you?
Didymus Judas Thomas' Hipocritical Oath Blog 