Comments on: Criticisms of Wikipedia - A Compendium http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080104/criticisms-of-wikipedia/ It's only a website... it's only a website... Sun, 21 Mar 2010 04:07:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc By: Anonymous http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080104/criticisms-of-wikipedia/#comment-2063 Anonymous Sat, 28 Nov 2009 07:15:20 +0000 http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080104/criticisms-of-wikipedia/#comment-2063 The problem with Wikipedia is that it's being controlled by a bunch of hyper-sensistive registered users. I've been accused of vandalism several times after making small, correct, and good faith edits. Do they seriously expect that every sentance written in good faith require ample documentation? Apparently, these people are too lazy to use Google and require ons of documentation up front. Even after including proper citations, I never received an apology. Another problem is that you have people patrolling articles in a subject (such as a county's local politics, etc.) that they know nothing about. The problem with Wikipedia is that it’s being controlled by a bunch of hyper-sensistive registered users. I’ve been accused of vandalism several times after making small, correct, and good faith edits. Do they seriously expect that every sentance written in good faith require ample documentation? Apparently, these people are too lazy to use Google and require ons of documentation up front. Even after including proper citations, I never received an apology.

Another problem is that you have people patrolling articles in a subject (such as a county’s local politics, etc.) that they know nothing about.

]]> By: Wendy Campbell http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080104/criticisms-of-wikipedia/#comment-1830 Wendy Campbell Tue, 02 Dec 2008 22:18:58 +0000 http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080104/criticisms-of-wikipedia/#comment-1830 I've been telling people all along that wikipedia cannot be trusted for truth and that it is used to smear people. I put an entry about myself once because someone quoted me (accurately for once) but they needed a citation. So I wrote a brief description about me. Well! No sooner that I did that, it appears as if there a people who paid (probably with our US tax dollars) to constantly monitor the entry on me and maintain the lies about me as well. Anyone who looks at my website www.marwenmedia.com and www.exposingisraeliapartheid.com can see that what they say about me on wikipedia cannot be true: since I adamantly say I am for completely equal rights for all regardless of religion, race, ethnicity, creed, gender, and there must be no double standards. As a political activist, I specialize in championing Palestinian human rights since our government allows Israel to deny them their rights. So you can guess who my political opponents are! It appears as if they are professional, paid character assassins! And wikipedia supports their mission. I am glad that more and more have come to be suspicious and distrustful of wikipedia, so that basically it has allowed itself to be discredited. I’ve been telling people all along that wikipedia cannot be trusted for truth and that it is used to smear people. I put an entry about myself once because someone quoted me (accurately for once) but they needed a citation. So I wrote a brief description about me. Well! No sooner that I did that, it appears as if there a people who paid (probably with our US tax dollars) to constantly monitor the entry on me and maintain the lies about me as well. Anyone who looks at my website http://www.marwenmedia.com and http://www.exposingisraeliapartheid.com can see that what they say about me on wikipedia cannot be true: since I adamantly say I am for completely equal rights for all regardless of religion, race, ethnicity, creed, gender, and there must be no double standards. As a political activist, I specialize in championing Palestinian human rights since our government allows Israel to deny them their rights. So you can guess who my political opponents are! It appears as if they are professional, paid character assassins! And wikipedia supports their mission. I am glad that more and more have come to be suspicious and distrustful of wikipedia, so that basically it has allowed itself to be discredited.

]]> By: wikieditor http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080104/criticisms-of-wikipedia/#comment-1825 wikieditor Wed, 26 Nov 2008 03:30:23 +0000 http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080104/criticisms-of-wikipedia/#comment-1825 You forgot to mention that Zionists work together to smear people who criticize Israel and its supporters, and white wash the articles of Zionists; they tag team like crazy to push their POV. You forgot to mention that Zionists work together to smear people who criticize Israel and its supporters, and white wash the articles of Zionists; they tag team like crazy to push their POV.

]]> By: Media @ LSE Group Weblog » Blog Archive » Two interesting wikipedia-related resources http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080104/criticisms-of-wikipedia/#comment-1791 Media @ LSE Group Weblog » Blog Archive » Two interesting wikipedia-related resources Thu, 02 Oct 2008 10:24:41 +0000 http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080104/criticisms-of-wikipedia/#comment-1791 [...] roundup of concerns from someone who has been both participating in it and studying it (inspired by this list of concerns by another critic, but adding links to specific [...] [...] roundup of concerns from someone who has been both participating in it and studying it (inspired by this list of concerns by another critic, but adding links to specific [...]

]]> By: Joseph100 http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080104/criticisms-of-wikipedia/#comment-1732 Joseph100 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 07:38:01 +0000 http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080104/criticisms-of-wikipedia/#comment-1732 Wikipeidia contributes nothing, it's a parasite in that it steals and plagiarizing content. Wikpeida hurts those whose bios are nothing more then character assassination, pov pushing editors/and admim, untouchable and out of control. Wikipeidia contributes nothing, it’s a parasite in that it steals and plagiarizing content. Wikpeida hurts those whose bios are nothing more then character assassination, pov pushing editors/and admim, untouchable and out of control.

]]> By: Wikipedia Review: Opinions and Editorials » Blog Archive » So what if it is broken? http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080104/criticisms-of-wikipedia/#comment-1632 Wikipedia Review: Opinions and Editorials » Blog Archive » So what if it is broken? Mon, 11 Feb 2008 09:17:40 +0000 http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080104/criticisms-of-wikipedia/#comment-1632 [...] Not so long ago, Gomi did a pretty good summary of what was wrong with Wikipedia (enshrined in blogland now). In recent posts, there have been some [...] [...] Not so long ago, Gomi did a pretty good summary of what was wrong with Wikipedia (enshrined in blogland now). In recent posts, there have been some [...]

]]> By: Wikipedia Review: Opinions and Editorials » Blog Archive » Wikipedia’s Museum of Defamation http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080104/criticisms-of-wikipedia/#comment-1522 Wikipedia Review: Opinions and Editorials » Blog Archive » Wikipedia’s Museum of Defamation Fri, 25 Jan 2008 18:43:34 +0000 http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080104/criticisms-of-wikipedia/#comment-1522 [...] the project”What is the life expectancy of Wikipedia?Wikia : Picks up where Wikipedia left offCriticisms of Wikipedia - A CompendiumMr. Wales goes to Washington2007 At The Review - “Wikipedia is a blog”Carolyn Doran : [...] [...] the project”What is the life expectancy of Wikipedia?Wikia : Picks up where Wikipedia left offCriticisms of Wikipedia - A CompendiumMr. Wales goes to Washington2007 At The Review - “Wikipedia is a blog”Carolyn Doran : [...]

]]> By: links for 2008-01-20 | Daily EM http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080104/criticisms-of-wikipedia/#comment-1509 links for 2008-01-20 | Daily EM Sun, 20 Jan 2008 04:20:49 +0000 http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080104/criticisms-of-wikipedia/#comment-1509 [...] Wikipedia Review: » Criticisms of Wikipedia - A Compendium summary of major points of criticism towards Wikipedia (tags: wiki wikipedia criticism critical encyclopedia community) [...] [...] Wikipedia Review: » Criticisms of Wikipedia - A Compendium summary of major points of criticism towards Wikipedia (tags: wiki wikipedia criticism critical encyclopedia community) [...]

]]> By: Saltimbanco http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080104/criticisms-of-wikipedia/#comment-1490 Saltimbanco Tue, 15 Jan 2008 05:44:06 +0000 http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080104/criticisms-of-wikipedia/#comment-1490 I think you missed the main thing: the system of Wikipedia is thoroughly subject to gaming. There is nothing about how the project is run, including Jimbo Wales' personal oversight, that reliably prevents propagandists or just fun-seeking vandals from controlling it. And so they do. I think you missed the main thing: the system of Wikipedia is thoroughly subject to gaming. There is nothing about how the project is run, including Jimbo Wales’ personal oversight, that reliably prevents propagandists or just fun-seeking vandals from controlling it. And so they do.

]]> By: Criticisms of Wikipedia « Eric Jennings http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080104/criticisms-of-wikipedia/#comment-1489 Criticisms of Wikipedia « Eric Jennings Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:53:50 +0000 http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080104/criticisms-of-wikipedia/#comment-1489 [...] students & their use of Wikipedia. One of the most vocal critics of Wikipedia and student use pointed me to a website that listed criticisms of Wikipedia. I said I would follow up on those criticisms, so here goes. My [...] [...] students & their use of Wikipedia. One of the most vocal critics of Wikipedia and student use pointed me to a website that listed criticisms of Wikipedia. I said I would follow up on those criticisms, so here goes. My [...]

]]>