Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Manipulating Wikipedia

    Manipulating Wikipedia

    In the continuing on-line war, Brett Kimberlin’s Wikipedia entry which documented his history has been taken down, and get this, the excuse given is that Kimberlin was the victim of a harrassment campaign.

    Patrick Frey, the victim of a true harrassment campaign, has the story:

    I have described Brett Kimberlin’s campaign of harassment against his critics as “brass-knuckles reputation management.” The idea is to intimidate and harass anyone daring to bring up Kimberlin’s extensive criminal history. There are other examples I’m aware of that can’t be fully told for various reasons, although I hope the victims choose to tell them.

    But one of the most concerning aspects of this reputation maintenance campaign is the way history is rewritten. And one example of that is the way that Kimberlin’s Wikipedia entry was whisked away from view on September 14, 2011….

    The idea that there is a harassment campaign against Brett Kimberlin is a reputation management theory that has been pushed for months by Brett Kimberlin, Neal Rauhauser, and Ron Brynaert — three people who engaged in the extraoardinary and very real harassment campaign against myself and other critics of Brett Kimberlin.

    So where did the Wikipedia editor get the idea that there was a harassment campaign against Brett Kimberlin? In early May 2012, I decided to write the editor, Richard Symonds, and ask why the page was deleted….

    Frey details the rest of the story in his exchange of e-mails.  Read it.

    And don’t trust Wikipedia on anything controversial, it easily is manipulated.

    DONATE

    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.

    Tags:

    Comments



     
     0 
     
     0
    jasond | May 27, 2012 at 7:21 pm

    Wikipedia is a lousy source. The problem is when someone gullible relies on the information on the site and gets Progressive bias regarding the subject matter.
    It’s a great propaganda tool for the left.


     
     0 
     
     0
    BigFurHat | May 27, 2012 at 7:46 pm

    Naaa. Wikipedia is totally legit –
    Look at their entry on Fauxcohontas:
    Warren listed herself as a Native American in the Association of American Law Schools directory of law professors, from 1986 to 1995. The Brown campaign and the Native American Rights Fund questioned her motives for the claim and its propriety.[41][42][43][44][45] Genealogist Chris Child at the New England Historic Genealogical Society has researched Warren’s claimed native ancestry and states that more research has to be done to make a full determination.[46][47][46][48] Warren said that she had heard family stories about her Cherokee ancestors her entire life (“my mother told me so”[49]) and had hoped it would create opportunities to meet people like her. But according to Warren, such opportunities never materialized and she eventually “stopped checking it off”. [50]

    I believe the author of this entry is Elizabeth Warren


     
     0 
     
     0
    BannedbytheGuardian | May 27, 2012 at 8:11 pm

    The tools to insert your own variations on the subject is open for you guys also.

    Just get in & change the article. Be smart -don’t just go in en masse -trickle the editing out over a month in a co – ordinated manner. That way it goes under the radar.

    It is a gem of a hobby !


     
     0 
     
     0
    OcTEApi | May 27, 2012 at 8:57 pm

    On Symonds’s talk page
    , someone writes:

    Your a tool
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tool

    edit: You’re

    lol


     
     0 
     
     0
    Voyager | May 28, 2012 at 10:59 am

    Wikipedia is very good in computer science, so-so in hard science and heavily biased in any of the philosophical fields.


    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend