edgeworthy
Well-known member
One Woman’s Mission to Rewrite Nazi History on Wikipedia
This is the part that has me really worried.
Kurt Knispel
to this ...
Kurt Knispel - Wikipedia
And people on other sites are applauding it!? When it is at best an incredibly lazy and poorly researched edit that could be better.
(Coffman very obviously didn't do any meaningful work on it at all.)
And has reduced an article to a worthless stub.
Now taking out the obvious propaganda and questionable sources is a valid point. However, there is more to editing an article than taking out the stuff you find questionable, you also have to do the barest minimum of genuine work to update it.
Coffman couldn't manage this. That's not rewriting history it is vandalising it.
All anyone has to do is look up the entry for Kurt Knispel on the German Language Wikipedia. Which provides vastly more material, all of which is reliably sourced, and without any of the doubtful sources.
Kurt Knispel – Wikipedia
(Bearing in mind that Google translate always manages to produce something anomalous)
[While the affairs of other sites are not our concern, there has been an enormous amount of virtue signaling over this elsewhere. And pointing out that Coffman's editing has done such a bad job is not taken well.]
This is the part that has me really worried.
What happed is that Coffman reduced this ...A particularly revered medal winner, or a high-ranking one, might survive Coffman's purge. But the results aren't pretty. When she arrives at Kurt Knispel's page, it says that he was "one of the, if not the, greatest tank ace of all time." His photo shows a young gunner with shaggy blond hair and a goatee. He flashes a smile, unaware that he is doomed.
Unfortunately for Knispel, his reputation rests almost entirely on stories told by Kurowski, as well as an account in the Wehrmachtbericht, the Nazi propaganda broadcast. Coffman strips away the apocryphal stories of action and adventure, like the one that says Knispel was held back from promotions because he assaulted a superior. When she's done, the article is reduced to four paragraphs, three of which relate to his death, at age 23, when he was struck by a Soviet tank. Later, someone will leave a short, sad note on the article's Talk page: "There used to be a lot of information here about his military career, unconventional attitude to military discipline etc. … Why has it been deleted?"
Kurt Knispel
to this ...
Kurt Knispel - Wikipedia
And people on other sites are applauding it!? When it is at best an incredibly lazy and poorly researched edit that could be better.
(Coffman very obviously didn't do any meaningful work on it at all.)
And has reduced an article to a worthless stub.
Now taking out the obvious propaganda and questionable sources is a valid point. However, there is more to editing an article than taking out the stuff you find questionable, you also have to do the barest minimum of genuine work to update it.
Coffman couldn't manage this. That's not rewriting history it is vandalising it.
All anyone has to do is look up the entry for Kurt Knispel on the German Language Wikipedia. Which provides vastly more material, all of which is reliably sourced, and without any of the doubtful sources.
Kurt Knispel – Wikipedia
(Bearing in mind that Google translate always manages to produce something anomalous)
[While the affairs of other sites are not our concern, there has been an enormous amount of virtue signaling over this elsewhere. And pointing out that Coffman's editing has done such a bad job is not taken well.]