(Page 2 of 3)
Evidently, the motive for encyclo-vandalism is sometimes just humor. According to a report in the New York Times, the contributor who entered false information about Seigenthaler (claiming he'd played a role in Robert Kennedy's assassination) was playing a joke on some friends. Since then, the perpetrator, Brian Chase, who was ferreted out, has apologized to Seigenthaler, who accepted his apology.
I tested the Wikipedia correction process while reporting for this article. After logging on, without giving an e-mail address, I edited the entry dedicated to musician Tom Waits. In a section on the artist in the 1990s, I wrote that Waits had played a concert with Elvis Costello, Elvis Presley, and Mr. Ed (the talking horse). Within 24 hours, the Presley and Mr. Ed references were removed, but the Elvis Costello citation -- also false, but not as glaringly so -- remained.
There are real, perhaps inevitable weaknesses in Wikipedia's system. But the Siegenthal ordeal seems to have unleashed a disproportionate number of Wikipedia critics. News site Official Wire, run by Baou.com, is now posting stories that allege “Nazi-style behavior” among Wikipedia contributors and editors.
And this week, a site called WikipediaClassAction.org went live, soliciting feedback and, more significantly, instances of monetary damages caused by Wikipedia. Their goal is to launch a class-action lawsuit against the site. When I called the phone number listed on that site, the person who answered refused to give his name, then rattled off a long series of allegations against Wikipedia. The charges felt specious to me, and were quite vitriolic.
A quick piece of sleuthing turned up a likely explanation: Baou.com also runs an organization called QuakeAid, the Wikipedia entry for which cites some questionable circumstances surrounding the organization and its founders. Furthermore, some of the anti-Wikipedia articles found on Official Wire are written by “Jennifer Monroe,” the same name listed as having registered the domain WikipediaClassAction.org.
Although Baou's actions imply a multi-pronged revenge campaign, some anti-Wikipedians appear to have more reasonable complaints. Daniel Brandt, the man behind wikipedia-watch.org (and also Google-watch.org), says that until Wikipedia drops its policy of allowing anonymous posts and edits, the quality of the site will suffer. “For research purposes you ought to be able to find [authors],” he says.
But Brandt, too, has a personal reason to be upset with Wikipedia. He admits his opposition to the site came after he learned that it included a page about him with links he considered unflattering. Brandt was a prominent draft resister in the 1960s.
Guest (Ivor Smith)
An informative article for I, as it shook me out of my nievity, that all that I read on-line, must be factual!
Guest (funny article)
funny that the writer s##t him self while trying to discredit wiki.
unfortunetly the writers atempt to prove the problems with the system just proved it works better than he knows.
he wrote
I edited the entry dedicated to musician Tom Waits. In a section on the artist in the 1990s, I wrote that Waits had played a concert with Elvis Costello, Elvis Presley, and Mr. Ed (the talking horse). Within 24 hours, the Presley and Mr. Ed references were removed, but the Elvis Costello citation -- also false, but not as glaringly so -- remained
however
Faithful [H] reader Peter Hamilton (who I’m assuming is a Roy Orbison fan) pointed out that the information of Costello and Waits playing together is indeed true. A quick google search netted me the tell tale result. A simple click under Actors on the more link revealed that both aforementioned artists did indeed play this concert together
Guest (funny article)
funny that the writer s##t him self while trying to discredit wiki.
unfortunetly the writers atempt to prove the problems with the system just proved it works better than he knows.
he wrote
I edited the entry dedicated to musician Tom Waits. In a section on the artist in the 1990s, I wrote that Waits had played a concert with Elvis Costello, Elvis Presley, and Mr. Ed (the talking horse). Within 24 hours, the Presley and Mr. Ed references were removed, but the Elvis Costello citation -- also false, but not as glaringly so -- remained
however
Faithful [H] reader Peter Hamilton (who I’m assuming is a Roy Orbison fan) pointed out that the information of Costello and Waits playing together is indeed true. A quick google search netted me the tell tale result. A simple click under Actors on the more link revealed that both aforementioned artists did indeed play this concert together
Guest (James)
Too bad Tom Waits DID play with Elvis Costello. You think the author could at least check information he was trying to falsify.
Guest (TR editor)
Re: Wrong by James: Give us a link to a reliable source saying that Waits played with Elvis Costello in the 1990s--and well even credit you! Thanks. -- Editor
You could just watch the video and see them together instead:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/cast-crew/B0000203YR/
Guest (Max)
Wikipedia works and at the same time does not work..
My profs at the University used to say that any reference to Wikipedia in any paper you submit, will be considered a minus and crossed-out and I think they are right about it. It is a good idea to get a first glimpse at a problem by looking at the wiki, but for more information, one should consider standard references and books.
However, an entire unnoticed problem is bias in the wikipedia. It is not so much about factual errors, but rather the supremacy of political belief systems. While this is not a big deal in the US wiki, it is in Europe. I have seen that socialist content doesnt allow any criticism on their pages, while they censor anything that goes beyond their political scheme. This might be a big problem in the future and is why I abstain from using any social science pages from the Wiki.
Guest (Sly)
What you are saying about Europe content is quite wrong. But may be its just that you dont agree with the content.
When you use censorship to tell the truth, its only the truth of the censor.
Guest (Andy)
It seems to me that Wikipedia is only slightly different than any other media source in history (newspapers, TV, etc.). There is always bias, either cultural or intentional. The difference discussed here is the transient nature of the information, so if referencing a hard copy should always be made, particularly noting specific date and time of the Wikipedia image. Does Wikipedia have a CM system so that, if necessary, the history canbe rebuilt?
Guest (Eric Hellweg)
While I dont doubt that Tom Waits and Elvis Costello played together some time in the 1990s, my false Wikipedia entry said that he played with Tom Waits at the Raven Theater in Healdsburg CA in 1996. I was at that show, and have a recording of it. Elvis Costello did not play.
Guest (Eric Hellweg)
While I dont doubt that Tom Waits and Elvis Costello played together some time in the 1990s, my false Wikipedia entry said that he played with Tom Waits at the Raven Theater in Healdsburg CA in 1996. I was at that show, and have a recording of it. Elvis Costello did not play.
Guest (Andy)
It seems to me that Wikipedia is only slightly different than any other media source in history (newspapers, TV, etc.). There is always bias, either cultural or intentional. The difference discussed here is the transient nature of the information, so if referencing a hard copy should always be made, particularly noting specific date and time of the Wikipedia image. Does Wikipedia have a CM system so that, if necessary, the history canbe rebuilt?
Guest (Aaron E. Klemm)
Baou and what Wikipedia has to do
First, its unfortunate that you legitimize Baous actions and the inflammatory articles on news.baou.com. They dont deserve to be valid voices in any discussion of Wikipedia.
Second, your conclusion is a bit overblown. Maybe Wikipedia *doesnt* have to adopt new tactics. I would argue the process is working despite recent and occasional problems.
The information and usefulness of Wikipedia content is improving daily--so whats wrong?
Guest (Ivor Smith)
An informative article for I, as it shook me out of my nievity, that all that I read on-line, must be factual!
Guest (James)
Too bad Tom Waits DID play with Elvis Costello. You think the author could at least check information he was trying to falsify.
Guest (Max)
Wikipedia works and at the same time does not work..
My profs at the University used to say that any reference to Wikipedia in any paper you submit, will be considered a minus and crossed-out and I think they are right about it. It is a good idea to get a first glimpse at a problem by looking at the wiki, but for more information, one should consider standard references and books.
However, an entire unnoticed problem is bias in the wikipedia. It is not so much about factual errors, but rather the supremacy of political belief systems. While this is not a big deal in the US wiki, it is in Europe. I have seen that socialist content doesnt allow any criticism on their pages, while they censor anything that goes beyond their political scheme. This might be a big problem in the future and is why I abstain from using any social science pages from the Wiki.
Guest (Andy)
It seems to me that Wikipedia is only slightly different than any other media source in history (newspapers, TV, etc.). There is always bias, either cultural or intentional. The difference discussed here is the transient nature of the information, so if referencing a hard copy should always be made, particularly noting specific date and time of the Wikipedia image. Does Wikipedia have a CM system so that, if necessary, the history canbe rebuilt?
Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.
On Twitter
Become a Fan on Facebook
Subscribe to the Feed
Guest (Aaron E. Klemm)
Baou and what Wikipedia has to do
First, its unfortunate that you legitimize Baous actions and the inflammatory articles on news.baou.com. They dont deserve to be valid voices in any discussion of Wikipedia.
Second, your conclusion is a bit overblown. Maybe Wikipedia *doesnt* have to adopt new tactics. I would argue the process is working despite recent and occasional problems.
The information and usefulness of Wikipedia content is improving daily--so whats wrong?
Reply