Comments on: Wikipedia’s Museum of Defamation http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080125/wikipedias-museum-of-defamation/ It's only a website... it's only a website... Fri, 30 Jul 2010 02:13:14 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc By: Candis Fickle http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080125/wikipedias-museum-of-defamation/#comment-2400 Candis Fickle Thu, 17 Jun 2010 09:43:37 +0000 http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080125/wikipedias-museum-of-defamation/#comment-2400 Hello, love the Madagaskar movies, great film! Hello, love the Madagaskar movies, great film!

]]> By: Dr. Levy http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080125/wikipedias-museum-of-defamation/#comment-1968 Dr. Levy Sun, 03 May 2009 01:31:29 +0000 http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080125/wikipedias-museum-of-defamation/#comment-1968 Why do I get a sick feeling that many Wikipedia administrators engage in furry fandom? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furry_fandom Why do I get a sick feeling that many Wikipedia administrators engage in furry fandom?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furry_fandom

]]> By: Dr. Jon Levy http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080125/wikipedias-museum-of-defamation/#comment-1898 Dr. Jon Levy Fri, 20 Mar 2009 02:46:34 +0000 http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080125/wikipedias-museum-of-defamation/#comment-1898 Some yo yo administrator at Wikipedia blocked me because I requested arbitration because of libel against my client. Someone really ought to sue these fascists! Since I claimed libel as the basis of arbitration they claimed it was a legal threat. The entire Wikipedia site is crap anyway,the university where I work as an adjunct marks down students who try to cite to their junk. Dr. Jonathan Levy, JD, PhD www.brimstoneandconpany.com Some yo yo administrator at Wikipedia blocked me because I requested arbitration because of libel against my client. Someone really ought to sue these fascists!

Since I claimed libel as the basis of arbitration they claimed it was a legal threat.

The entire Wikipedia site is crap anyway,the university where I work as an adjunct marks down students who try to cite to their junk.

Dr. Jonathan Levy, JD, PhD
http://www.brimstoneandconpany.com

]]> By: Karl http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080125/wikipedias-museum-of-defamation/#comment-1810 Karl Wed, 05 Nov 2008 19:26:01 +0000 http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080125/wikipedias-museum-of-defamation/#comment-1810 Isn't Wikipedia a big spoof, a large hoax on society? What kind of site defames innocent people, and lies about truth and facts first, then tries to correct errors? The entire premise behind it is ridiculous. Who in their right mind would take that site as real? I know the world has dumbed down, but come on people. Isn’t Wikipedia a big spoof, a large hoax on society? What kind of site defames innocent people, and lies about truth and facts first, then tries to correct errors? The entire premise behind it is ridiculous. Who in their right mind would take that site as real? I know the world has dumbed down, but come on people.

]]> By: jackparsons http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080125/wikipedias-museum-of-defamation/#comment-1612 jackparsons Fri, 08 Feb 2008 23:32:37 +0000 http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080125/wikipedias-museum-of-defamation/#comment-1612 This is something that it takes an empathic man to understand unless it happens to you. Unfortunately, it *did* happen to me. It's a lot like being attacked by hackers: you quickly realize that any attempts to remedy it cause the attention devoted to the defamatory material to grow exponentially. I was just a modest web-writer at the time. Some Wikipedia user created a bio for me, which I thought was cute. It was never more than 1 or 2 lines, and I'd be willing to guess that the person who created it didn't have any idea about my gender, race, age, or anything -- that's how unnotable I am. Yet it somehow passed two or three nominations for deletion. A year later, I notice it says something to the effect that I should spend more time washing dishes and less writing. It had been up like that for three months (I'm not famous, remember?) That was actually pretty funny, until a bonafide stalker got hold of it. I was finally able to get some sympathetic admin (actually, another writer who had a resume comparable to mine and couldn't understand why it made me "notable" -- egos are wonderful things if you know how to stroke them) to break the rules and speedy delete it... only to have someone else come along and put it into deletion review. Thank God it failed. It took a good month to get the material off of there. It's still on a multitude of scraper sites (this is more than a year later), but fortunately they never archived the version in question. I understand this is a pretty common story, but I'd argue it's even more common than you'd believe on account of people like me that preferred to try to handle this as quietly as possible. The only way I could handle it was to ask someone to technically break the rules (or rather, enforce the rules how he thought they should be rather than how they were). This is something that it takes an empathic man to understand unless it happens to you. Unfortunately, it *did* happen to me. It’s a lot like being attacked by hackers: you quickly realize that any attempts to remedy it cause the attention devoted to the defamatory material to grow exponentially.

I was just a modest web-writer at the time. Some Wikipedia user created a bio for me, which I thought was cute. It was never more than 1 or 2 lines, and I’d be willing to guess that the person who created it didn’t have any idea about my gender, race, age, or anything — that’s how unnotable I am. Yet it somehow passed two or three nominations for deletion.

A year later, I notice it says something to the effect that I should spend more time washing dishes and less writing. It had been up like that for three months (I’m not famous, remember?) That was actually pretty funny, until a bonafide stalker got hold of it. I was finally able to get some sympathetic admin (actually, another writer who had a resume comparable to mine and couldn’t understand why it made me “notable” — egos are wonderful things if you know how to stroke them) to break the rules and speedy delete it… only to have someone else come along and put it into deletion review. Thank God it failed. It took a good month to get the material off of there. It’s still on a multitude of scraper sites (this is more than a year later), but fortunately they never archived the version in question.

I understand this is a pretty common story, but I’d argue it’s even more common than you’d believe on account of people like me that preferred to try to handle this as quietly as possible. The only way I could handle it was to ask someone to technically break the rules (or rather, enforce the rules how he thought they should be rather than how they were).

]]> By: Harald K http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080125/wikipedias-museum-of-defamation/#comment-1561 Harald K Fri, 01 Feb 2008 11:28:05 +0000 http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080125/wikipedias-museum-of-defamation/#comment-1561 Completety agree with Gregory. The hypocrisy of Wales living by different rules than these poor beleaguered souls just shows how corrupt wikipedia's power structure is. Completety agree with Gregory. The hypocrisy of Wales living by different rules than these poor beleaguered souls just shows how corrupt wikipedia’s power structure is.

]]> By: Gregory Kohs http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080125/wikipedias-museum-of-defamation/#comment-1528 Gregory Kohs Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:26:06 +0000 http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080125/wikipedias-museum-of-defamation/#comment-1528 This is probably the best-written, most accessible Wikipedia Review blog column yet. I am forwarding this link to all of my "mainstream" friends. People who don't know Wikipedia's inherent wrongs can certainly understand this. Besides, where else are you going to find the phrase "beleaguered spaceman" so hilariously used? This is probably the best-written, most accessible Wikipedia Review blog column yet. I am forwarding this link to all of my “mainstream” friends. People who don’t know Wikipedia’s inherent wrongs can certainly understand this.

Besides, where else are you going to find the phrase “beleaguered spaceman” so hilariously used?

]]> By: The Review http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080125/wikipedias-museum-of-defamation/#comment-1527 The Review Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:23:06 +0000 http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080125/wikipedias-museum-of-defamation/#comment-1527 To digg this story go to http://digg.com/tech_news/Wikipedia_s_Museum_of_Defamation To digg this story go to

http://digg.com/tech_news/Wikipedia_s_Museum_of_Defamation

]]> By: Jon Awbrey http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080125/wikipedias-museum-of-defamation/#comment-1525 Jon Awbrey Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:37:05 +0000 http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080125/wikipedias-museum-of-defamation/#comment-1525 I couldn't figure out whether «Gaging» was supposed to be «Gagging» or «Gauging» — then I decided it works either way. I couldn’t figure out whether «Gaging» was supposed to be «Gagging» or «Gauging» — then I decided it works either way.

]]>