I am presently on the steep part of the Wikipedia learning curve. My primary concern is that Wikipedia is not providing a neutral view regarding the topic Politicization of Science and tends to support the idea that religious people are less scientifically rigorous or honest than atheists. This is exactly the opposite of my experience.
I've been principally a science educator for the past twenty years with some forays into math, computers, engineering and a bit of work conducting corporate training. My personal perspectives and thoughts are MY OWN--and were justifiably removed as I now understand. The problem I have is that publishing dissenting opinions is often nearly impossible. I had seen so many biased articles on Wikipedia in the past that I assumed it was essentially a soapbox. My bad.
Having worked in both secular and religious academic settings, I have never failed to offend someone with my thoughts. I think it is intellectually dishonest to imagine that the politicization of science only exists on the non-dominant sides of any issue. Now I must go find the source material needed to supprt my article. In some cases this is letters or articles that I wrote some years ago.
As far as this being my POV, I agree. While it's not a crime to think, clearly it is unacceptable to write first-person research, opinion or conjecture. It also appears to be against the rules to subvert dominant paradigms. However, within the boundaries of the five pillars, Wiki is going to discover that I will not let poor scholarship stand. Science must proceed empirically--not based on things taken on faith (whether that is my personal faith, or some other belief system based on anything that is not verifiable). Thus, I believe I am a natural Wikipeian--so I doubt the ride will be nearly as bumpy as predicted. The only caveat is that I expect to post very little.
~~~~