Page 2 of 2 [ 21 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Zwerfbeertje
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 6 Sep 2007
Age: 123
Gender: Male
Posts: 362

01 Jan 2008, 6:09 am

Fedaykin wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/06/wikipedia_and_overstock/
It seems Wikipedia has intentionally put itself in a position of power, with the ability to censor information. Perhaps time to start calling it Wikipravda?


The Register ought to know better, proxy servers, open or not, can represent a problem when they they are abused, as was apparently the case. Those people should just bypass their isp's proxy server, go to a decent isp or simply create an account-name within Wikipedia (no email required). Otoh, if this isp is bothered by the ban, they can dump the abuser.

Bagley fights dirty, from the article: "But Bagley questioned whether she even looked at it. So he sent her a few more files, and this time, he included a small script - spyware, in other words ..."

Try to pull such a trick on me and I'll block an entire /24

I don't find it surprising that Bagley got banned, seeing how he acted. He tried to abuse Wikipedia for his own goals, created several accounts (suckpuppetry) and harassed other editors. He should have just sticked with wiki's standards and protocols, used reliable sources and, when neccesary, rfc's and arbitration.

Edit: Btw, that ip address is listed as open-proxy on dsbl.



LeKiwi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,444
Location: The murky waters of my mind...

01 Jan 2008, 6:48 pm

beau99 wrote:
LeKiwi wrote:
I use it to get the gist of what something is, like a bit of background to explain something, but I generally then take that and research further to get more accurate details.

Except in most cases, the more accurate details are already there.


Except for all the ones that have been edited by people with vested interests. Hence why you take those and then have a closer look elsewhere.

I believe it was an Australian guy who wrote a programme last year that could trace the IP addresses of people who'd edited pages of wikipedia, and found politicians, the FBI and CIA, amongst others, as heavy editors?


_________________
We are a fever, we are a fever, we ain't born typical...


robots_jesus
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: 31 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 5

01 Jan 2008, 8:43 pm

The problem with Wikipedia is that is censorse information about Ron Paul and the truth about 9/11



mechanima
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Nov 2005
Age: 66
Gender: Female
Posts: 524

02 Jan 2008, 3:58 am

Lord_Leinad wrote:
Wait a minute... Is their actually any (reasonable) people left who think Wikipedia is actually a source of good information? I mean, it's a laughing stock compared to legitimate encyclopedias.


I think Wikipedia is actually a source of good information.

It is certainly where I get most of mine. :lol:

Yes, it IS possible to "game the system" for a while, and even just because Wikipedia has so much earned credibility, that can temporarily distort the way a topic is perceived on a far wider scale, but, that can happen just as easily on more "controlled" media. What can, and, to date, DOES always happen on Wikipedia is that because of the nature of consensus, sooner or later it "self corrects", like water striving to find it's own level. That can never happen in any more controlled environment, where distortion tends to become set in stone, particularly when there are vested interests at play, sometimes to a truly shocking degree.

M



777
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 243

03 Jan 2008, 4:17 pm

Gamester wrote:
Anubis wrote:
Great, wikipedia becomes biased. It shows its true face. Screw the power-hungry admins, I hope that someone hacks into wikipedia and shuts them down for a day.


Your wish is my command, I'll check with a few people this week and see if they can do it. if I'm lucky, I could get them to take Wiki out for a week.


And there's no doubt in your mind someone at the NSA has already seen this?