Skip to comments.Contributer to Wikipedia has Fictional Side (wikipedia fraud)
Posted on 03/04/2007 10:00:30 PM PST by lqclamar
Under the name Essjay, the contributor edited thousands of Wikipedia articles and was once one of the few people with the authority to deal with vandalism and to arbitrate disputes between authors.
To the Wikipedia world, Essjay was a tenured professor of religion at a private university with expertise in canon law, according to his user profile. But in fact, Essjay is a 24-year-old named Ryan Jordan, who attended a number of colleges in Kentucky and lives outside Louisville.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Specifically - Essjay claimed to be a homosexual theologian and frequently espoused far left versions of Christianity in his article edits. He basically used his phony Ph.D. to browbeat his leftist point of view into articles on Christianity by citing himself as an expert.
He is also one of dozens of radical gays who CURRENTLY populate the upper tiers of wikipedia's administration. This guy is just the tip of the iceburg at Wikipedia.
How long before the Times hires him? (snicker)
Strange to see the site discussing itself in a 3rd person way.
The Russian version of Wikipedia is worse - the expert arbitrators are clearly from the Russian government. Articles on the Moscow theater hostage crisis and Beslan - written by survivors and relatives of those who died - get deleted faster than they can be posted.
Like many of the other pervs who run wikipedia, he posted a misleading profile that only says he's a "retired" lawyer without mentioning that his retirement is involuntary. He used his lawyer credentials to rise up the Wikipedia sysop circuit and is now the head of the Arbitration board - wikipedia's highest level of administrators and the final voice on content dispute.
I've pretty much given up on wikipedia. It's a fun idea to go in and collaborate on the historical record, but the editors with authority will simply overwrite anything that doesn't jive with their left-wing gay agenda. Waste of time.
I find Wikipedia creepy. I once went on there and corrected some political bias and which ever power-that-be was on duty tracked me down by my IP and sent me on-screen messages lecturing me.
I was then banned or locked out from making changes -- forever.
Very left wing. And very gay. It's probably not a far cry to say that around 35-40% of wikipedia's ADMINISTRATORS are homosexuals or other sex perverts. The percentage is even higher in the upper levels of wikipedia's heirarchy. But should we expect anything different from a site that was founded by a well known internet pornographer who also tried to cover up his porno business when wikipedia became popular?
This is Stephen Glass all over again.
There's also been a very large movement to show an islamic point of view on nearly any subject. Or at least, what they'd like the islamic pov to be.
Good luck trying to correct or remove that noise as well.
That's really creepy.
Sounds like Orwell's 1984.
Better save it. It looks like they are planning to make it disappear as part of their coverup: "This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy."
Of course, it's not like that doesn't happen here on FR. Ever notice how many "doctors" we have when there's a bioethics debate? Or "scientists" when there's an evolution thread? How come no one ever cites their own authority as garbage men when there's an article on public works? I'd generally rather talk to a garbage man than a doctor or scientist.
Wikipedia is simply once source of information, and a very good one. Like anything, it is best to get information from multiple sources and then come to your own conclusion. Yes, some entries on Wikipedia are biased, but so is most everything else. It is your job to make up your own mind based on the best available evidence.
I loved the pimping he did on The New Yorker. They "corrected" their "mistake" in the latest issue. That's one down, eleven million to go.
Russian version of Wikipedia is similar to American Wikipedia only in Russia is the poster who gets deleted and not just the posting.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.