A supporter of Deepak Chopra criticizes Wikipedia's practice in editing the page about him.

Chopra's metaphysical statements are unsupported by what is actually known in quantum physics. They are extraordinary claims, and would require extraordinary proofs. Proofs would entail a systematic series of experiments that Chopra hasn't reported doing. This is pseudoscience, and it is good that Wikipedia makes this clear.

It is also true that patients may die from using "alternative medicine" instead of scientific medicine — Steve Jobs is perhaps the most famous example of this, though we are arguably better off without him — and it is Wikipedia's responsibility to point this out.

However, some of the practices described in the article do seem wrong to me. Two clear examples are those about the Yoga section and the bibliography. That's why I am posting this note.

Real scientists sometimes propose strange metaphysical hypotheses, but they recognize that these are speculative and don't present them as certain truths.

I am disappointed that the article refers to Wikipedia as "open source", thus misrepresenting the meaning of "free" in "free encyclopedia".

Louisiana thugs shot at driver Chris Few, and killed him and his son.

The are obfuscating the situation by saying that maybe Few had a gun and shot his own son, but this seems to be pure fabrication.

The thugs have admitted that Few was not shooting at them (he didn't have a gun). They claimed Few was backing up his car towards them, but the evidence shows that was false too.

Bank of America says that half the jobs in the US might be automated in the next 20 years.

Plutocratist rulers will use this as an opportunity to cut wages for the remaining jobs, and will shuffle the surplus humans around until they die.

Everyone: call on NBC not to have Donald Trump host Saturday Night Live.

A supporter of Deepak Chopra criticizes Wikipedia's practice in editing the page about him.

Chopra's metaphysical statements are unsupported by what is actually known in quantum physics. They are extraordinary claims, and would require extraordinary proofs. Proofs would entail a systematic series of experiments that Chopra hasn't reported doing. This is pseudoscience, and it is good that Wikipedia makes this clear.

It is also true that patients may die from using "alternative medicine" instead of scientific medicine — Steve Jobs is perhaps the most famous example of this, though we are arguably better off without him — and it is Wikipedia's responsibility to point this out.

However, some of the practices described in the article do seem wrong to me. Two clear examples are those about the Yoga section and the bibliography. That's why I am posting this note.

Real scientists sometimes propose strange metaphysical hypotheses, but they recognize that these are speculative and don't present them as certain truths.

I am disappointed that the article refers to Wikipedia as "open source", thus misrepresenting the meaning of "free" in "free encyclopedia".