The Top 10 Reasons Students Cannot Cite or Rely On Wikipedia
October 27, 2011 by Mark E. Moran
9. You especially can’t rely on something when you don’t even know who wrote it.
8. The contributor with an agenda often prevails.
In theory, the intellectual sparring at the heart of Wikipedia's group editing process results in a consensus that removes unreliable contributions and edits. But often the contributor who “wins” is not the one with the soundest information, but rather the one with the strongest agenda.
7. Administrators on Wikipedia have the power to delete or disallow comments or articles they disagree with and support the viewpoints they approve.
6. Sometimes “vandals” create malicious entries that go uncorrected for months.
2. Accurate contributors can be silenced.
Invasion of the troll armies: from Russian Trump supporters to Turkish state stooges
Truth in Numbers? Everything, According to Wikipedia
-Real encyclopedia must be written by experts.
-Only way to solve Wikipedia inaccuracy is make editors write under their real name.
-Early 20th century was The Progressive Era of the United States. Indians lost most of their land in this period. Massacres organised for the purpose of taking their land. But nothing mentioned about this in Wikipedia.
-Wikipedia becomes the first and last source of knowledge for many students.
The Truth According to Wikipedia
-Wikipedia is crowd version of truthiness.
Keen says that without expert gatekeepers to discern what actual facts are, the danger exists that the wider community may simply invent its own perceived truths.
On the moral bankruptcy of Wikipedia’s anonymous administration
Why should anyone trust the decisions of anonymous Wikipedia administrators? They could easily be personally biased, based on ignorance, or otherwise worthless. If someone writes lies about you, there is no way you can name and shame the liar, or at least the Wikipedia admin who permits the lie. Instead, you have to play the stupid little Wikipedia game on its own turf. You can’t go to the real world and say, “Look, so-and-so is abusing his authority. This has to stop.” In this way, by remaining anonymous, Wikipedia’s decisionmakers insulate themselves from the real-world responsibility that journalists routinely bear for their statements and publishing decisions. If you were a Wikipedia administrator, wouldn’t you feel absolutely bound to make your identity known? Wouldn’t you feel cowardly, craven, to be standing in judgment over all manner of important editorial issues and yet hiding behind anonymity? I know I would. Why shouldn’t we hold Wikipedia responsible for making its administrators’ identities known? A Wikipedia administrator who refuses to reveal his or her identity is morally bankrupt, because unaccountable authority is morally bankrupt. Members of democratic societies are supposed to know this.
Wikipedia, Paid Contributors and Propaganda
by Miles Mathis
It would be so much better for everyone if Wikipedia just admitted the truth: it was created by the government and is written in full by government operatives of one sort or another.
Government Trolls Are Using "Psychology-Based Influence Techniques" On YouTube, Facebook
Tuatha De Danann
Have you ever come across someone on the Internet that you suspected was a paid government troll? Well, there is a very good chance that you were not imagining things. Thanks to Edward Snowden, we now have solid proof that paid government trolls are using psychology-based influence techniques; on social media websites such as YouTube, Facebook and Twitter.
Beyond vandalism: Wikipedia trolls
4.1. Trolls’ behaviour (what do they do?)1.Trolls are engaged in intentional, repetitive, and harmful actions;
2.Their activities largely violate Wikipedia policies;
3.They are active not only on the encyclopaedic part of Wikipedia (e.g. writing and editing articles), but have high interest and destructive involvement within the Wikipedia community (e.g. discus‐ sion about policies, and intensive interactions with other users and sysops);
4. They work in isolation under hidden virtual identities.
Biases of Wikipedia – A Case History
http://ahealedplanet.net/wikimass.htm By Wade Frazier
I found Wikipedia to often be a good source of information, but I also noticed a disturbing bias that mirrored the Euro-Anglo-American-centric bias that has dogged the West for centuries. In late 2007, I read a Wikipedia article that referred to a list of massacres. I studied that subject matter for many years, and was immediately stuck by the list’s overwhelming bias. History’s greatest genocide was what the Spanish invasions inflicted on the Western Hemisphere’s natives during the 16th century. That genocide was punctuated early and often by massive slaughters, usually as a way of establishing political control. In that list, there was not one mention of any of those slaughters. In addition, the English version of Wikipedia is obviously dominated by Americans (with the British also well represented), and when the Indian genocide began happening on what became American soil, the massacre list’s bias was even more evident...In addition, many massacres on that list were wartime slaughters, particularly World War II slaughters such as the Katyn massacre, perpetrated by the Soviets. American slaughters of civilians during World War II were conspicuously absent.
...While some edits were understandable, they were obviously made by white people who began framing the European/American massacres of Indians as somehow justified, or that the person in charge of the slaughters disobeyed orders to do so (which was a strained interpretation of the events), to provide “context...Somewhat surprisingly, among the worst offenders were Wikipedia's administrators...This situation of Wikipedia’s bias in favor of the exterminators, while the exterminated receive passing mention, if at all, is typical in the West. Today’s genocide in Iraq, to seize control over the world’s hydrocarbon deposits, is another typical instance of the West’s murderous, collective egocentrism.
Wikipedia, the error-ridden encyclopaedia, has become a dangerous tool
By Jonathan Margolis 15 February 2009
Wikipedia has become a dangerous tool for lazy students, spiteful cranks and truth-twisting politicians.
Wikipedia is a US Gov't Fraud -
How US Agents Can Embed in Wikipedia, Plant Propaganda,
Delete Facts, Deceive and Attack Citizens - Wikipedia and the CIA
These allegations about Wikpedia as a tool of CIA and US criminal corporations, announced long ago to the world by Dr Sachs, are now even more fully PROVEN by new large-scale research announced by Wired News, and also on Alex Jones' Prison Planet website.What we are facing, is that Wikipedia may already be the ultimate Trojan horse of US government propaganda and intelligence operations. Via this one overwhelmingly dominant website, the thousands of nameless agents at CIA and NSA headquarters, can now deceive and defraud millions of US citizens and much of the rest of the world as well. These agents can smear and attack those who challenge the government; they can easily launch lies and propaganda on this powerful web forum that can falsify anything, and undermine almost anyone...So when you do an internet search, often what you find among your "Top 10" search results, are several results from Wikipedia, and then several results from Answers.com (which basically repeat Wikipedia). Most people will never get beyond these entries, and thus the US intelligence and propaganda agencies already control what many people read on the internet...Does this mean that most of Wikipedia is written by the government, or supervised by it? No, not at all. A lot of Wikipedia, most of it in fact, the CIA guys don't care about. Indeed, it was part of the genius of Wikipedia that they could enroll millions of people in helping to create this CIA-backed vehicle. It is much more powerful and legitimate-seeming, if people get used to looking things up on Wikipedia, if they go there to read helpful things about Beethoven or Tibetan rugs. Wikipedia's power also derives from the short attention span and laziness of the average person. To get an impression of something or someone, people jump on the internet and google or search. Then, for their quick initial view of a person or topic, they often jump onto Wikipedia. If Wikipedia smears someone, that person is pretty well smeared, factual or not, and people usually will not investigate any further.
Wikipedia is also the direct tool for controlling the world's corporate media employees - the so-called "journalists" - who base their articles now, largely on what they themselves read on Wikipedia, and then they pompously intone, "According to Wikipedia . . . ", as if it were somehow very clever of these "journalists" to consult Wikipedia at the top of their Google-search.
Journalists instinctively feel, that Wikipedia is the tool of the US government and the big corporations, and thus that they can follow Wikipedia whenever a Wikipedia article is supporting the US-corporate establishment.
The journalists then publish shoddy, corrupt and outright false "news articles", which are based on Wikipedia as a source, and then Wikipedia can then use these "major news media" articles as new "authentic sources" for Wikipedia. It is a perfect circle of propaganda corruption, managed by the US intelligence agencies. Wikipedia is the dream of Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels come true. - Worldwide control of what people read and think, via one website under US government control...Like much of America's CIA-backed operations since the 1970s, Wikipedia does its work under the friendly face of a "non-profit foundation". In fact, Wikipedia is one of those organizations that deserves to be sued and shut down immediately, it's such a monstrous fraud and deception today, such an invitation to government mind control in the future. Who knows the number of people whom it has already slandered and harmed amid those 1-million-plus CIA-backed Wikipedia web pages. Even just in general commercial terms, Wikipedia is a totally illegal monopoly as well as a US-government backed fraud. It's keeping legitimate providers of information from being more successful, as well as supporting criminals tied to the US regime. - But US lawyers don't dare to touch the Wikipedia monster, and the US judges won't let them touch it. It's at the core of US "national security", the US attempt to be dictator over the whole world.
10 Underhanded Ways Governments Use The Modern Media
Criticism of Wikipedia
User:LatinoMuslim/Wikipedia Boycott Campaign
Wikipedia: Pseudo- encyclopedia of the lie, censorship and misinformation at Amazon.com
Wikipedia: Pseudo- encyclopedia of the lie, censorship and misinformation
Wikipedia: Pseudo- encyclopedia of the lie, censorship and misinformation
Wikipedia is Jew Biased
Boycott Wikipedia.Do not USE
Why Wikipedia Sucks