| |
|
  |
 Wikipedia, Censorship, Israel and Terrorism, The Israel News Agency piece that started it all |
|
|
| blissyu2 |
|
the wookie
Group: On Vacation
Posts: 4,596
Joined:
From: Australia
Member No.: 5
|
Well I don't really understand her point of view, or what really happened here. I see a Request for Comment that was deleted, but I don't really get it.
I mean, there is no dispute that the articles on Joel Leyden and Israel News Agency, as well as the blanking of IsraelBeach's user page and talk page were wrong. There is also a huge doubt whether it was right to ban IsraelBeach for exposing Woggly's real name, especially if it is true that Woggly is a public figure. That is certainly debatable.
But what is the crux of this? Why did all of this happen? Why did Joel Leyden/IsraelBeach get targetted like this? What was going on?
This is what I can piece together:
Joel Leyden posted on Israel News Agency about the Vote for deletion on the article he wrote, which in turn labelled him as a critic of Wikipedia. Whilst it survived the vote and people generally sided with him, they recognised that he had said bad things about Wikipedia.
For a time, they tried to "convince" him that he was "mistaken" and that Wikipedia is, in fact, perfect. When this failed, some people, in this case Woggly, decided to harass him in relation to things that were increasingly unrelated to the original reason. This is like the fabled wiki stalker Antaeus Feldspar, but in reality many Wikipedians do it. It could be simply a stress reliever. Cyde does it all the time, and knows he can get away with it because nobody will question you bashing critics.
When Joel Leyden tried to expose this in the form of a Request for Comment against Woggly, this led to a lot of people seeing the depths of corruption that were involved in this case. Wikipedia couldn't risk it, so quickly went ahead with fabricating evidence to push for a ban.
When he wrote the new article about it, Wikipedia went further on a deletion spree, to get rid of all hint of it. So that they don't get in trouble.
Ultimately, I doubt that this had much to do with Woggly at all. I doubt that Woggly is really to blame. Whilst it is possible that Slim Virgin did, since I note that SV blanked his user page, its probably more to do with that original article that he wrote criticising Wikipedia.
Wikipedia hates critics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| blissyu2 |
|
the wookie
Group: On Vacation
Posts: 4,596
Joined:
From: Australia
Member No.: 5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Joel Leyden |
|
Member
Group: Contributors
Posts: 114
Joined:
Member No.: 172
|
QUOTE(sgrayban @ Sat 13th May 2006, 10:24pm) 
Joel, You know Alyssa Lappen by any chance?
No, but after seeing some of the work that she does, I would would enjoy being associated with her. The INA has a third story in our torpedo tubes. Look for it in the next 24 hours. It does not have my by-line, rather a very experienced, professional academic discusses Wikipedia and if it's fit for the academic community? I see that Danny is being pressured somewhat - at least in public on his discussion page. People want to know "why?" For myself, after being abused on Wikipedia, I have no interest in having a bio there, not until they enforce their own policies of blocking users for personal attacks (i.e. - Gili Bar-Hillel) and implementing a policy of accountability for all edits. Is Slimvirgin a "sockpuppet" of Danny Wool? If not, she / he has a lot of time on his / her hands. ;> I am very impressed with this Website - Wikipedia Review - there is much work to be done here, in Wikitruth and other sites that take Wikipedia to task. The very fact that they describe Hamas as a "militant" organization, is a red flag. The UN says states they are terrorists - period! Why they are reaching for "balance" as if they were a news organization wishing for an interview? I am hopeful that the wise VC's now behind Wikipedia will "heal" the hurtful and irresponsible actions on that Website. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Sgrayban |
|
Gone
Group: On Vacation
Posts: 907
Joined:
Member No.: 7
|
QUOTE(Daniel Brandt @ Sat 13th May 2006, 10:29am) I don't understand why all the page blanking. It's ridiculous. Woggly (Gili Bar-Hillel in Tel Aviv) has a blog in Hebrew with her picture on it, holding her baby. If Gili felt threatened, that would have been taken down by now. And if Gili was publicity-shy, that blog would never have existed in the first place. SlimVirgin's blanking is just more unnecessary drama, designed to make Wikipedians feel like martyrs to the cause of making sure that "every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge." And her picture is still there with her baby. The last time she edited her blog was 24.5.06 so this was just days ago. Apparently she doesn't feel so threatened and is lying about it all to gain support. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Selina |
|
Cat herder
Group: Staffy
Posts: 1,513
Joined:
Member No.: 1
|
QUOTE(Joel Leyden @ Fri 2nd June 2006, 3:47pm) QUOTE(sgrayban @ Fri 2nd June 2006, 2:14pm)
I think he is both. You could check the Board of Directors for each place. But I know he is a paid employee.
I found out yesterday that Wikipedia is being investigated big time by a US Federal agency (not the State Department / NSA - they have their own agenda). As I have stated before, you cannot abuse people under the American flag even if you are a "service provider" and get away with it. Look for some sparks within the next two to three weeks. Not good news for Wikipedia's investors. Oooo, I look forward to hearing about that (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) You might want to talk to Daniel Brandt, I believe he has a lot of info on how Wikia/Wikimedia are using charity funds for profit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
| |
