Vijay Bahadur Singh, How Wikipedia fails to protect articles from libellous additions Options

[RMHED]

Vijay Bahadur Singh a one sentence BLP article. An experiment ensues.

On April 2 I added this piece of libel, on April 4 I added yet more libel. For both pieces of libel a reference was added, a quick check would have shown that the references were bogus, this didn't happen, even though "(Tag: possible BLP issue or vandalism)" appeared as an edit summary after the first addition of libel.

Part two: Removal of the libel.

I created the account User:Wawawaer and removed the libel, this was reverted as vandalism. After removing the content a couple more times, (once with the edit summary "remove lies") Wawawaer is of course blocked for edit warring. At no time does the blocking admin seem to have done a basic check to see if the information was indeed lies, he just restored the libel to the article.

So in summary, an anon ip adds two bits of badly sourced libel to a BLP

A new editor tries to remove the libel

The new editor is blocked for edit warring and the libel is restored to the BLP.

This is the essence of Wikipedia's systemic failure when it comes to showing due dilligence as regards BLPs. Poorly sourced controversial additions go unchallenged, removal of these additions results in a block.

Wikipedia actively protects libellous content.

[A Horse With No Name]

I created the account User:Wawawaer and removed the libel, this was reverted as vandalism. After removing the content a couple more times, (once with the edit summary "remove lies") Wawawaer is of course blocked for edit warring. At no time does the blocking admin seem to have done a basic check to see if the information was indeed lies, he just restored the libel to the article.

Well, C. Fred is strictly C-minus when it comes to brainpower. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/dry.gif)

The new editor is blocked for edit warring and the libel is restored to the BLP.

But only for 31 hours. Once the block is lifted, you are free to run amok! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)


This post has been edited by A Horse With No Name:

[Milton Roe]

I created the account User:Wawawaer and removed the libel, this was reverted as vandalism. After removing the content a couple more times, (once with the edit summary "remove lies") Wawawaer is of course blocked for edit warring. At no time does the blocking admin seem to have done a basic check to see if the information was indeed lies, he just restored the libel to the article.

Well, C. Fred is strictly C-minus when it comes to brainpower. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/dry.gif)

Now, now, read the link and don't believe everything some WR person tells you, even if it is RMHED. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Wawawaer

C. Fred's block summary reads: (Disruptive editing: Intentional gaming of the system to put false material into articles). In other words, he called THIS one perfectly right, and the block was NOT for edit warring. Unless he reads WR and went back and changed his reason, of course. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ermm.gif)

[gomi]

Unless he reads WR and went back and changed his reason, of course.

Got it right in one! Look at the timestamps -- the revdels and the block are clearly a result of this thread.

[taiwopanfob]

Jasper Deng, the principle libel-protector in this case, has gone completely berzerk:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=422796373

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/confused.gif)

Like many accidents, this is a failure of multiple parts, chain-reaction style, not just one key part. Mind you, Jasper Deng is clearly the weak link in this chain, but C. Fred or any admin should not be trusting other editors carry out due diligence work re: BLP.

[A Horse With No Name]

Jasper Deng, the principle libel-protector in this case, has gone completely berzerk:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=422796373

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/confused.gif)

Like many accidents, this is a failure of multiple parts, chain-reaction style, not just one key part. Mind you, Jasper Deng is clearly the weak link in this chain, but C. Fred or any admin should not be trusting other editors carry out due diligence work re: BLP.

Come on, it is no secret that Lar and RMHED are one and the same person. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)