Congress 'made Wikipedia changes'

BBC News Online ^ | 090206 | BBC News

[stylin19a]

agh....I should have read the whole thread.

good job. that guy's a bum

[stylin19a]

Hey, maybe we could have the "Wiki-pedia Freeper police.".
Every now and again, we fact check and change what needs to be changed .(I know, useless effort as the lib monitors @ Wiki will adios the truth about their muses)

[G.Mason]

Good reminders, all.

Will Rogers. What a man he was.

Thanks

"We're all ignorant ... just about different stuff" ... Will Rogers

[brothers4thID]

Silly staffers should know better than to do such things from traceable IP's.

[absolootezer0]

Why would anyone want to rely on it, is my question.

i don't rely on it, but i refer to it alot. i use it as part of a comparison with other references (at least 2 others). it is interesting to see what kind of issue it is, and what kind of changes are in there.

[stacytec]

Wikipedia has some good definitions for topics non-political. If you are a coin collector looking for a history on a coin, you can find some good stuff. But the definitions on all matters political have a spin on them. I saw the definition for "Southern Strategy" last week and was amazed at how openly biased and left slanted it was. Some folks have contested it but the definition looks like it was still written by the DNC.

[stacytec]

BTW, has this story been getting ANY coverage in the USA ( just noticing this was a BBC aticle)??

[GAB-1955]

"Wikipedia - the online, free for all, user beware, system that may or may not be accurate. Why would anyone want to rely on it, is my question."

Not everything relates to politics. Most of the world doesn't relate to politics, and I fear you have a narrow view of the value of Wikipedia. When it comes to technical or scientific information, Wikipedia is the equal or superior to a printed encyclopedia. It's also good for providing details on cultural items. Any controversial event is fair game, of course, but there tends to be a consensus. It's not simply U.S. politics; the "Kosovo War" article, in my opinion, can't reach a consensus easily. The Serb apologists and the NATO champions still don't agree. This is why this one has a "The neutrality of this article is disputed" flag on it.

The advantage of this model is it can be easily edited, and if people care about the article, mistakes, sloppy thinking, and even out-and-out lies can be erased. The disadvantage is that mistakes, sloppy thinking, and out-and-out lies can be inserted.

Therefore, like other tools, it's good for some things and poor for others. You wouldn't use a hammer for opening bottles, would you? Don't use Wikipedia without other sources to provide alternative points of view.

[GAB-1955]

"Maybe we can change Teddy's Chappaquidic incident into a tragic car washing execise, Vince Foster's death is now simply an example of improper park usage, and Monica Lewinsky's blue dress was the first attempt by the Clintons to institue a constituional right to free dry cleaning."

It would be caught on the first edit and the change log would say "revert vandalism from ( )".

[RockinRight]

I'll say one thing, I've written and edited several Wikipedia articles, and done the research. In most cases outside politics, they're usually fairly accurate. Articles about politicians and, to a lesser degree, political philosophies or ideas, are often "vandalized" intentionally.

[upchuck]

IMHO, Wikipedia is an item of interest. But I question it's veracity and take nothing I read there as the truth unless I have double checked it. Given that, I doubt it's value beyond being a toy.

Buyer beware.

[ohioWfan]

In most cases outside politics, they're usually fairly accurate.

I got some really good info about the musical, 'Showboat' last week. ;)

[pabianice]

Using the public history of edits on Wikipedia, researchers collected the internet protocol numbers of computers linked to the US Senate and tracked the changes made to online pages.

1. How can this be done when most people are using high speed cable or DSL?

2. Why would anyone use a reference that can be corrupted by anyone else?

[Darksheare]

I wonder what Fienswines office edited..

[RockinRight]

Most recently, I updated the article on Ronnie James Dio, including an entire section about the dispute on his true age.

[lawgirl]

Duh.

[TradicalRC]

That's what wikipedia is. Caveat emptor.

[TradicalRC]

Hey! We're sympatico.

[Tom Bombadil]

Hey! We're sympatico.

You must be a thinking person :)

[AmericanDave]

Liar Alert. (Senator Harkin).