The "Reasons Why Wikipedia Is Not So Credible" Thread

[The Spawn]

Reason #100

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_(United_States)

 

[jaguarr]

Reason #101:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,128634-c,companynews/article.html

Should Microsoft Pay for Wikipedia Edits?
Australian engineer says he probably will take payment for tech edits on some Microsoft subjects.
Nancy Gohring, IDG News Service
Tuesday, January 23, 2007 11:00 AM PST

A software engineer in Australia has said he was offered payment by Microsoft to edit certain entries in the Wikipedia online dictionary, opening a heated debate about the ethics of such a move.

Rick Jelliffe, chief technology officer of XML tools company Topologi, said he will probably accept a contract from Microsoft to edit Wikipedia entries on ODF (OpenDocument Format) and OOXML (Microsoft Office Open XML), competing document format standards.

In a blog posting on the O'Reilly Web site, Jelliffe said he recently received an e-mail from Microsoft saying that the company wanted to contract someone "independent but friendly" for a couple of days to provide "more balance" on Wikipedia concerning the ODF and OOXML formats. Jelliffe said he rarely uses Microsoft products and does not imagine he is viewed as a Microsoft enthusiast.

Jelliffe, who lives in Sydney, wrote The XML & SGML Cookbook and describes himself as a standards enthusiast. He says he has added material to Wikipedia entries in the past, and that he doesn't consider himself as being hired to add pro-Microsoft information--just to correct errors.
Debate Storm

His disclosure unleashed a heated debate about the ethics of a company paying someone to edit Wikipedia entries, and the effect such payment has on the credibility of the site. "From now on we should take the Wikipedia entry on OpenDocument with a grain of salt," wrote Daniel Carrera, an ODF developer, in an e-mail.

Other comments on Jelliffe's blog posting weren't so kind. "Since you openly admit being paid by Microsoft you immediately destroy any credibility as a neutral commentator. End of story," one person wrote.

The matter is particularly sensitive given the Wikipedia entries in question. Microsoft created OOXML to compete with ODF, an electronic document format backed by Sun Microsystems, IBM, and open-source companies. ODF appeals to users interested in open-standard document formats that will ensure they can continue to access their existing files and can lessen their dependence on Microsoft. While the formats are competitive, some companies, such as Corel and Novell, have said they'll support both.

It's not yet clear what will happen if Jelliffe does make changes to the pages. Wikipedia "tends not to look favorably in terms of conflict of interest, and paying someone is a conflict," says David Gerard, a volunteer spokesperson for Wikipedia.
Block Paid Editors?

Jelliffe could potentially be blocked from contributing to the site. The English language site is administered by about 1000 volunteers who have the authority to block editors from contributing to the site, Gerard says. Publicity people who update the Wikipedia page about companies they represent routinely get blocked from the site, he says.

Given the attention brought to this particular incident, however, Gerard finds it likely that readers will closely watch for changes made by Jelliffe and respond with their own updates and changes, resulting in an overall improvement to the relevant pages.

A representative from Microsoft's external press office in the United Kingdom couldn't confirm that Microsoft had made the offer to Jelliffe.




jag

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

Hahaha "independent but friendly".

 

[jaguarr]

Hahaha "independent but friendly".

I know. What a bunch of slimy jackasses.

jag

 

[Kyalesyin]

I know. What a bunch of slimy jackasses.

jag

You honestly expected anything else?

 

[jaguarr]

You honestly expected anything else?

No, but it doesn't stop my disgust.

jag

 

[Dew k. Mosi]

Reason #100

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_(United_States)

This article is becoming very long.
Please consider summarizing or transferring content to subtopic articles.

I stopped reading there

 

[The Spawn]

Damn, even after editing it, its disgusting.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Had Conner been fired, the title would have gone to Tamiko Nash, previously Miss California USA, who was the first runner up. This would have been the first time since 1957 that a Miss USA titleholder was dethroned. Donald Trump chose to have a Miss USA who is a drug user over having one who is of African descent. Even a winner who has to undergo substance-abuse treatment, during her is reign, is more acceptable as a role model than a Black titleholder.

Two days after Conner was allowed to keep her title, Miss Nevada USA Katie Rees was fired after racy photos surfaced of her kissing other young women, exposing one of her breasts, simulating oral sex, and pulling down her pants to show her thong underwear at a party in Tampa, Florida.[25] The new Miss Nevada is not African-American.

I got a chuckle from this one.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Gary Coleman is believed to be the fabled 'Chupicabra' of Mexico.

 

[Catman]

Wiki is alright. You just have to double-check the info you get from there.

 

[Warhammer]

I like Wiki.
Nothing is ever DRASTICALLY wrong.

...well, sometimes..........

 

[TEDDY]

If there isn't anything about TEDDY in it, why should anyone trust it?

 

[Arkady Rossovich]

Only staff members should edit their website entries,simple as that.

 

[Honey Vibe]

They invite the greater internet community to flag inaccuracies, and considering it's an encyclopedia on everything-that-ever-has-been-EVER, ...there probably will be some inaccuracies. In all fairness they can't be everywhere at once, and they have always listed credibility as their goal, which is all you can promise with individual contributions.

In other words, I'm sorry ..........why do we all hate Wiki, again?

 

[The Spawn]

I don't.

 

[Kaleb]

is it possible to create info about each memeber of the hype community forums on the wiki?

 

[jaguarr]

They invite the greater internet community to flag inaccuracies, and considering it's an encyclopedia on everything-that-ever-has-been-EVER, ...there probably will be some inaccuracies. In all fairness they can't be everywhere at once, and they have always listed credibility as their goal, which is all you can promise with individual contributions.

In other words, I'm sorry ..........why do we all hate Wiki, again?

I don't think anyone's saying that they hate Wikipedia in here, so I'm not sure where you got that from. What IS being raised are questions about the potential for unethical abuse of the system by companies who would like to skew public perception about certain things or by malicious users who get their jollies spreading misinformation. There's a fundamental issue that needs to be resolved in it's functionality. Conceptually, it is an awesome idea. We just need to find a way to at least minimize the chance for corruption, like most things in this world unfortunately.

jag

 

[X-Chick]

None of the stuff I've looked up there has been wrong. Not yet anyway.

 

[jaguarr]

None of the stuff I've looked up there has been wrong. Not yet anyway.

I occasionally find incorrect things there. You just have to verify the information that's there to make sure it's credible before you use it.

jag

 

[X-Chick]

I've never used it for anything of any importance and probably wouldn't. I only find it useful for more obscure things.

 

[The Shape]

Wiki is pretty good about things that have been proven, or events that have happened already. Like if you want to look up old TV show, book, or movie, you'll get some good info on it at Wiki.

If you're looking for info on something upcoming, that's where you'll run into trouble, since people just post rumors and such.

 

[The Spawn]

[YT]qcdC0af4jJY[/YT]

 

[CorpusBlack]

Only staff members should edit their website entries,simple as that.

That's a massive undertaking that they couldn't handle.

 

[Jack Rabbit]

I know a guy who routinely inserts that he's been romantically linked to various models every week.

Very credible.