User:Alohascope

"Wikipedia .. if you want my money .. you must meet MY criteria of freedom of information."

Hello, I am Alohascope regarding Wikipedia. I'm a Senior Citizen of wide interests mostly in non-fiction, but in recent years my focus has been cosmology, bible, and history of human migration. I am seriously disappointed in Wikipedia because while Wikipedia makes frequent appeals for funds its treatment of topics is at times terrible. For instance, a brief article almost void of references on biblical cosmology contains many errors, such as that the bible was written beginning 500 BC, whereas the oldest portions of the bible are at least 3,500 years old. My attempts at correcting the errors are undone by editors (Allthefoxes to name the main culprit) who seem to despise the bible, even though I add to the information with references while leaving the original text unchanged. The same thing happened with an article on creation of planets. While Wikipedia contains some excellent articles, it will have to improve its content substantially before I contribute money.

Two simple changes would improve Wikipedia dramatically as well as advancing mankind's knowledge: 1 - allow within articles links to 'alternatives.' 2 - allow alternatives which do not need consensus approval or prior publication.

However, it has become quickly apparent that with editors such as Allthefoxes Wikipedia has no real value whatever.