Nexus - 1406 - New Times Magazine-pages

Page Content (OCR)

"Wikipedia Police" George W. Bush" were all deleted. The first-mentioned page Disgruntled people at odds with Wikipedia are numerous. The = might indeed not be seen as important in an encyclopaedic "pseudophysicist" (to quote Wikipedia) Jack Sarfatti considers environment, but the "wiki" (a page in the encyclopaedia) for himself to be a victim of the service and even considered Dylan Avery, the producer of the most-watched documentary film litigation at one point. He found that certain libellous information —_in Internet history, clearly merits a biographical page on an online had been posted about him. Of course, he, like anyone else, can encyclopaedia. Wikipedia, however, thought otherwise. o in and alter that information, which is what he tried to do. He These are just some of the examples that people have g J P P tried posting at various times of the day, but each time, within experienced with the "service". At best, it is clear that the minutes, the changes were undone—suggesting that the moderators have never been trained or validated for their Wikipedia moderators were credentials. But Sarfatti has also constantly monitoring certain pages. drawn attention to the so-called When he dug further, he came to the "Wikipedia arbitration", which Wales conclusion that Wikipedia seemed to h h | . has seen as the "self-cleaning" and be in the hands of a group of sceptical whe came to the conclusion the deus ex machina designed to re- minds, intent on making sure there that Wikipedia seemed to be esta lish Wikipedia's credibility — were no mysteries and no . even though he elected a college conspiracies. In the hands of a group drop-out to preside over it. Indeed, when you consult a variety of sceptical minds, intent on Upset about his own case and of subjects on Wikipedia, you will unable to rectify the situation, notice a certain "mindset" that making sure there were no Sarfatti commented on a private excludes certain opinions. Just two mysteries and no conspiracies. email list: "They have set up a examples... Virtual Shadow Government in Paul Smith is an ardent sceptic of which they now have their own the Rennes-le-Chateau and Priory of courts to adjudicate ‘litigation'." He Sion mysteries (which are at the core 0’ made the point that the theory is that Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code) and is responsible for most of whoever controls the Web controls the Earth—and there is indeed the Wikipedia entries on the subject. Some of these entries are that potential. Perform a Google websearch and if Wikipedia has blatantly biased and others contain serious factual errors. In both a result on what you search for, the Wikipedia entry will come up instances, I adjusted the wording and removed the errors. At no on top. So whatever you want to know, you will probably Google point did this mean that the Priory was depicted as genuine—far __it and find it in Wikipedia. "Googlepedia" thus has a virtual from it. In fact, I felt that an error-free posting would actually monopoly on information and does indeed, as Sarfatti said, bring enhanced value to the entry. In this case, the entries control the Web—and knowledge. remained up for a number of months, but then were returned to Googlepedia offers a one-stop shop for teachers and anyone their negative, erroneous entries. The "Wikipedia Police" should else who wants to find information. Teachers have stated that this have seen that the new entry was less neutral and more biased is exactly the case. What is in Wikipedia—and the opinions than what was on there, but they did not revert to the previous expressed therein—is almost directly passed on to students. It version. The question is: why prefer erroneous information over __ begs the question as to why there is still a need for teachers, as more neutral wordings? No wonder that experts find numerous students are equally able to do a websearch... errors in every article on Wikipedia...when Wikipedia seems to prefer to promote errors over factual statements. I also tried to add further information about dissenting theories on the Corpus Hermeticum, specifically the work of Leiden University professor Bruno Stricker, giving due reference to his name and publications (including his PhD thesis). In this instance, Wikipedia moderators removed the section themselves, stating that I needed to give "more sources"—though I had actually given more sources than most of the other statements that maintain the status quo in this entry, namely that the Corpus is a second- or third-century AD creation rather than a third-century BC codification, as Stricker (and others) argue. Examples of such unprofessional editing, with a bias towards maintaining the status quo and specifically downplaying if not removing controversial information, run into the hundreds if not thousands. Paul Joseph Watson of Prison Planet (http://www.prisonplanet.com) has noted there is a concerted campaign to erase the 9/11 Truth Movement. Furthermore, pages which they and == : = _ = = like-minded individuals created, such as "List of "Just conducting a routine Random Carbon-Footprint Test. Republican sex scandals", "People questioning the 9/11 Could I see your last 12 months’ utility bills, please?" Commission Report" and "Movement to impeach that Wikipedia seemed to be in the hands of a group of sceptical minds, intent on making sure there were no mysteries and no conspiracies. So mt erwiffe Set ere fe "Just conducting a routine Random Carbon-Footprint Test. Could I see your last 12 months’ utility bills, please?" NEXUS +13 «he came to the conclusion OCTOBER — NOVEMBER 2007 www.nexusmagazine.com