Bell Pottinger investigation Options

[mbz1]

Jimbo declines unblock with a reason: "pending outcome of Bell Pottinger investigation" I do not recall seeing Jimbo declined unblocks. Does somebody know what is Bell Pottinger investigation?

[mbz1]

Wikipedia probes edits by Bell Pottinger

John Cryer, the Labour MP who has launched a bid to establish a public register of commercial lobbyists with access to Parliament, said he was concerned about the suggestion that lobbyists were able to change clients’ profiles on Wikipedia.

Mr Cryer, MP for Leyton and Wanstead, said: “If they’re going in and editing Wikipedia that would be questionable, the whole idea is that the website is completely open encyclopedia, and it is open to anybody, it has a democratic function.”

He added: “If people who are being paid to represent others are going in and editing, it sounds to me to be at the very least open to question. I would be interested to know how they justify that sort of activity, nobody reading it would be aware of what has happened, people read Wikipedia expecting total objectivity.”

[thekohser]

John Cryer, the Labour MP who has launched a bid to establish a public register of commercial lobbyists with access to Parliament, said he was concerned about the suggestion that lobbyists were able to change clients’ profiles on Wikipedia.

Mr Cryer, MP for Leyton and Wanstead, said: “If they’re going in and editing Wikipedia that would be questionable, the whole idea is that the website is completely open encyclopedia, and it is open to anybody, it has a democratic function.”

He added: “If people who are being paid to represent others are going in and editing, it sounds to me to be at the very least open to question. I would be interested to know how they justify that sort of activity, nobody reading it would be aware of what has happened, people read Wikipedia expecting total objectivity.”

That may be one of the most gullible, deluded politicians I've ever heard. I suppose he also imagines "people donate to the Wikimedia Foundation expecting total efficiency".

Has anyone made the connection that this was just ONE public relations firm, out of probably thousands of such firms worldwide? If even 10% of them are fiddling with Wikipedia, there's still another thousand User accounts to ban, aren't there?

[mbz1]

Has anyone made the connection that this was just ONE public relations firm, out of probably thousands of such firms worldwide? If even 10% of them are fiddling with Wikipedia, there's still another thousand User accounts to ban, aren't there?

I believe a better question to ask is: If even all such accounts detected and banned would it resolve a problem, or for every account that is banned a new one would be made?

If you are to add to this problem such people as Johann Hari who was using wikipedia entries to attack his real life opponents,
or such admins as Fæ (T-C-L-K-R-D) who wrote articles about his not notable friends,
or such admins as Gwen Gale (T-C-L-K-R-D) who wrote not just one, but two articles about herself only because she wrote an absolutely idiotic free e-book, and decided it was enough to call herself "Noteworthy separatist feminists."
or even wikipedia co-founder Jimbo Wales, who used to edit his own bio...
how reliable wikipedia would look to you?

BTW I just found that not only me made a connection between Bell Pottinger and Hari

Meanwhile a number of users of micro-blogging site Twitter have been pointing out that one of the Independent’s own columnists has himself been caught up in controversy over the changing of Wikipedia entries.

One wrote: “It's laughable that the Independent can attack Bell Pottinger for changing Wikipedia entries but not fire Johann Hari who did much worse”.

Hari has apologised after it emerged that he had recycled quotes and used a false name to change his Wikipedia entry as well as those of his detractors.

This post has been edited by mbz1:

[Eppur si muove]

Has anyone made the connection that this was just ONE public relations firm, out of probably thousands of such firms worldwide? If even 10% of them are fiddling with Wikipedia, there's still another thousand User accounts to ban, aren't there?

I believe a better question to ask is: If even all such accounts detected and banned would it resolve a problem, or for every account that is banned a new one would be made?

If you are to add to this problem such people as Johann Hari who was using wikipedia entries to attack his real life opponents,
or such admins as Fæ (T-C-L-K-R-D) who wrote articles about his not notable friends,
or such admins as Gwen Gale (T-C-L-K-R-D) who wrote not just one, but two articles about herself only because she wrote an absolutely idiotic free e-book, and desided it was enough to call herself "Noteworthy separatist feminists."
or even wikipedia co-founder Jimbo Wales, who used to edit his own bio...
how reliable wikipedia would look to you?

And then there is the faux-objectiveness of NPOV. The policy page on the English Wikipedia has links to other languages, for example Arabic, Hebrew, Greek and Turkish. Does anyone expect that the existence of similar policies will mean that the nationalist conflicts in Palestine and Cyprus will be written up in remotely similar ways in these different language versions of the encyclopedia?