Re: Rating articles on Wikipedia

Hi, Love2uall and thanks for posting about this!

Yes, we need to still get involved in editing Wikis all over (not spaming, just adding thing in a non-bias way.. if possible, as I know all has some bias on some level). I did rate the CSA to my liking, I do feel more can be added to it, lots more in fact. I think we need to make edits or get involved with discussions on Wiki's Talk-pages. I think we need to be adding non-bias peer-reviewed/other studies and articles which are scientific, meet Wiki's standards so they will not get removed (only, say if a good challenge is bought up in the talk-page of said article (we know, however, that this isn't always the case).

More so, we should be adding studies/reports from IPCE, but shouldn't link through IPCE to said study or report (knowing Wikis' bias..) or the same goes for studies/reports from Newgon or MHAMic etc., that really bust-holes in some of the CSA cited on the Wiki now. I saw this because, once I was in a on-going debate on YouTude he asked to if I had any proof, so I linked to, and sent him links to IPCE and the Raid study. He and she came back with the usual reply to Raids' report.. also I gave him many pages from Newgon as well, but again came back with BS. He and her wasn't really the best to debate with. I even told him that Newgon had the original sources for many of their articles.

What seems strangely to me, is that even if ppl do go to Newgon, IPCE or MHAMic etc., they could easily search the titles of said reports/studies and will end up at their original sources. But most anr not willing to do the work.

Anyhow, just some of my thoughts.