Unfortuately the censorship was imposed. As I mentioned before, certain people successed into removing the detailed information of the 2009 meeting.
Please give your support here:
Talk page of the manin bilderberg meeting
We will have to create an appeal to review the removal of that page, if someone more experienced on this would come forward and help me, it would be great.
I had added so many sources to it, Dutch TV news with press news, and others, and it is all gone!!!! Please help!!!!
The Bilderberg meetings happens every year with the 150 most important, influent and rich people in the world. In 2009 the meeting happened in Greece, getting great coverage from the mainstream media.
I created a 2009 Bilderberg wikipedia article, which has been attacked and censored, and now agents of desinformation try to remove the entire page using very weak justifications, to say the least.
That’s how I answered they arguments for removal:
- “That the guardian article had a great coverage but was only referenced”: an initial summary was done based on the article, but with a lot of space for expantion. The removal of the page won’t help for the completeness of the subject.
- “That participants had been already mentioned in the main article and to use the list of participants”: in the main article of the main subjets you will find a summary about the last of even all of its sub-parts. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britain%27s_Got_Talent#Series_three and Britain%27s_Got_Talent_%28series_3%29. About moving the names to the list of participants, that list doens’t give an idea of the cronology, so you can’t see easily who went in the last meeting, and finally we need to have cohesion here, why not keeping all the known and relably sourced information about this especific event all in the same page, the 2009 Bilderberg_Meeting page.
- “Regarding the security, the only non-trivial is said to be worthless because the jornalist didn’t named his source.” it’ś on the right of the jornalist to not reveal directly his source, that doesn’t take the credibility of the information. And after all, the excessive security was confirmed accross the whole series of the Guardianś article and others.
- “That the majority of the article is not notable and the fact of the few jornalists that covered the event have been detained and followed is not notable.”. What is more notable then, Susan Boyle ending up in the hospital? Or all the results of all Britain’s Got Talent have its place on wikipedia? Is this more important than a secret and highly secure catching up of the 130 more important, influent and rich people in the world under a black-out of the mainstream media?
Now an administration of wikipedia uses the non-sense attacking to justify the removal: “Delete – pov fork, conspiracy fancruft; not a likely search term; individual meetings should be presented in context within Bilderberg Group. Tom Harrison“.
The separated page nothing has to do with fork of point of view, it’s only a way to better structure the article and to avoid getting too big main pages. Labeling Bilderberg Group “conspiracy fancruft” without better reasoning show that the person doesn’t have any knowledge on the subject.
The 2003 article was already “merged”, in practice deleted, which created a precedent to not allow any detail on the Bilderberg Meetings in wikipedia.
Please help to improve and source the articles. Let’s not let them ravage the articles.