New comments about Cheri Yecke's Wikipedia biography

When I was pursuing my complaint that Wikipedia was violating its 501(C)(3) nonprofit organization tax status by blocking rebuttals to criticisms of a candidate in an upcoming public election, I did not make comments about Cheri Yecke's Wikipedia bio because I was afraid that such comments would be misinterpreted as conceding the false claim that truth is a defense against charges of censorship of rebuttals (that claim is a false extension of the correct claim that truth is a defense against charges of libel). However, I learned that Yecke is actually not a candidate in a public election and hence I now feel free to comment about her bio again. Yecke is now one of seven finalists for appointment to the position of Florida Commissioner of Education.

The most important thing is that Cheri Yecke's Wikipedia bio has no credibility because rebuttals of criticisms of her are banned there (the absence of an "edit this page" tab at the top shows that there is no open editing). Just in case, though, I will counter some of the things that the bio says:
.

The versions of the Minnesota Science Standards circulated by Yecke contained language used by intelligent design advocates in the Teach The Controversy campaign which casts doubt on evolution while offering intelligent design as a competing theory. The version that was circulated among the public did not include these revisions. PZ Myers and other critics of intelligent design deemed the move an attempt to misinform the public in order to sway the committee decision in favor of intelligent design using public opinion.

For starters, the "Teach the Controversy" campaign does not specifically offer intelligent design as a competing theory -- the "Teach the Controversy" campaign just promotes teaching the strengths and weaknesses of evolution theory, and many of those weaknesses do not concern ID.

Also, the above statement gives the false impression that two different versions of the Minnesota Science Standards were being simultaneously circulated for the purpose of deceiving the public. This is quite a bit different from Yecke's following explanation in a TV interview at the time:

Host: What happened with the evolution versus creationism there were a couple of copies floating around, there was, was it confusion, or was there, go ahead…

CPY: We, we had a major screwup, and I, I apologize. Uh, there were several versions going around, we had some, some versions on a hard, on a hard drive, some on a floppy disk and we ended up putting the wrong one on our website. As soon as the, uh, it was brought to our attention we fixed it and so the ones that are up there now are correct. It’s the, it’s the consensus document and that’s the one that we’ll be talk talking about at the public hearings.

Also, Wikipedia said,

She cited the pro-intelligent design Santorum Amendment as supporting her effort.

The Santorum Amendment is not "pro-intelligent design" -- it does not mention intelligent design at all. This is evident from Wikipedia's own webpage on the amendment.

I mean no offense against Cheri Yecke, but I am surprised that she has a Wikipedia biography -- she just does not seem notable enough. There are thousands of public officials just like her across the USA.

I hope she gets the job.
.