Biograph Studios - Update, Wikipedia article up for Peer Review Options

[Nya]

Since when does anybody on Wikipedia Review have to actually justify their fantasies about the massive legislation / litigation / prosecution that's about to bring all of Wikipedia crashing down?

You're right. I've apparently confused this with the Snopes message board. My mistake. [/sarcasm]

Nya, I wish I could go into detail but cannot because of legalities. I can say that they have used extortive measures to pressure private corporate information that is held confidential under law. But I do thank you for your question.

I wasn't asking for details, I was simply asking what crime the organization was being investigated by the federal government for. I don't quite understand part of your sentence: "they have used extortive measures to pressure private corporate information". How can they pressure information?

Nya, this is only one of the things they have done. They pressure a company or private corporation to reveal priviledged information. If you do not, they discredit you on Wikipedia as being fake, or not real. That can be a criminal offense. But this is only one small thing they have done. there are other things that I cannot go into that are being investigated. I do thank you for your inquiry:)

Again, I wasn't looking for additional information, except that your first explanation was apparently missing a word: compare "used extortive measure to pressure private corporate information" and "pressure a company or private corporation to reveal privileged information." I understand what you're alleging.

[biographco]

Since when does anybody on Wikipedia Review have to actually justify their fantasies about the massive legislation / litigation / prosecution that's about to bring all of Wikipedia crashing down?

You're right. I've apparently confused this with the Snopes message board. My mistake. [/sarcasm]

Nya, I wish I could go into detail but cannot because of legalities. I can say that they have used extortive measures to pressure private corporate information that is held confidential under law. But I do thank you for your question.

I wasn't asking for details, I was simply asking what crime the organization was being investigated by the federal government for. I don't quite understand part of your sentence: "they have used extortive measures to pressure private corporate information". How can they pressure information?

Nya, this is only one of the things they have done. They pressure a company or private corporation to reveal priviledged information. If you do not, they discredit you on Wikipedia as being fake, or not real. That can be a criminal offense. But this is only one small thing they have done. there are other things that I cannot go into that are being investigated. I do thank you for your inquiry:)

Again, I wasn't looking for additional information, except that your first explanation was apparently missing a word: compare "used extortive measure to pressure private corporate information" and "pressure a company or private corporation to reveal privileged information." I understand what you're alleging.

I completely understand, and again, we appreciate, and thank you for interest and input.

[dtobias]

To translate into plain English, people on Wikipedia said they wouldn't take this guy's word for it and put things he claims to be true about his company in the article entirely on his say-so; they required some sort of proof they were actually verifiably true. Since he claims that any such proof would require disclosing confidential business information, making any such requirement (you know, requiring that some actual evidence exist that what he's saying is true before allowing the article to reflect it) is (in his mind) inherently "extortion" and a criminal offense. (Actually, Wikipedia policies require that information be from a reliable source, generally a published one, so that digging into his private business documents, even if it were possible, would be useless for Wikipedia reference purposes... so his secret papers are entirely safe from Wikipedians trying to dig into them.) He also has some weird conspiracy theories about Wikipedians implanting viruses in his computers or something. If he's really talking to government officials about this stuff, I imagine they're laughing uproariously once he leaves.

[biographco]

To translate into plain English, people on Wikipedia said they wouldn't take this guy's word for it and put things he claims to be true about his company in the article entirely on his say-so; they required some sort of proof they were actually verifiably true. Since he claims that any such proof would require disclosing confidential business information, making any such requirement (you know, requiring that some actual evidence exist that what he's saying is true before allowing the article to reflect it) is (in his mind) inherently "extortion" and a criminal offense. (Actually, Wikipedia policies require that information be from a reliable source, generally a published one, so that digging into his private business documents, even if it were possible, would be useless for Wikipedia reference purposes... so his secret papers are entirely safe from Wikipedians trying to dig into them.) He also has some weird conspiracy theories about Wikipedians implanting viruses in his computers or something. If he's really talking to government officials about this stuff, I imagine they're laughing uproariously once he leaves.

Mr. Tobias, this will be my last statement on this. This is not just Wikipedia taking "My word" as you well know. There are many reliable references that are published by established sources that confirm this company. Every one was discounted by Wikipedia and minimized, or disregarded. Every endorsement from government and reputable organizations have been ignored by Wikipedia. There was statements sent to us requesting that if we did show business information, this would "Prove" who we are, so you are incorrect once again. This is irrelevant now, since Wikipedia's reputation is now so tainted as to even be pulled from many schools due to its lack of creditability. Having countless remarks from almost every so called "Editor" of Wikipedia of us being "Kooks" and from you sir when you stated "You are toast!" are all inflamatory and confrontive remarks far from any kind of unbiased publication. There have been other threats as well through Wikipedia linked individuals. Insults are the result of a personal agenda and biased. The more there are, such as your statements here, the more obvious the personal agenda there is. Again, we are not the only target of biased agendas at this "Encyclopedia" with such a tarnished reputation, but definately one. Also, for the record, the government officials did not laugh. Last statement.

[Moulton]

There is nothing wrong with a commercial enterprise engaging in promotional public relations.

But naked PR is not suitable for inclusion in an encyclopedic article about a commerical enterprise. If a commercial enterprise wants to make credible advertising claims, it must back them up with objective data.

[biographco]

There is nothing wrong with a commercial enterprise engaging in promotional public relations.

But naked PR is not suitable for inclusion in an encyclopedic article about a commerical enterprise. If a commercial enterprise wants to make credible advertising claims, it must back them up with objective data.

Please review the article on Wikipedia. There was no naked PR in the original article, just information on the company. All of the unusual frivolous items included were placed there by these "Editors" in an effort to make us look "Bad" in thier words. Please review the archive history in the history section of the article. It states this was the agenda in writing. Any attempt to correct this was stopped by them long ago. Even some unfortunate editors that did try to correct this were accused of being part of "Biograph" and banned from Wikipedia. For creditable data, please refer to our website and all of our references in business publications, and other reputable non-Wiki encyclopedias. Thank you.

This post has been edited by biographco: Wed 20th February 2008, 3:40pm

[Moulton]

I'll wait for the story to be made into a feature length motion picture.

I understand there are companies that make movies out of interesting stories.

[biographco]

I'll wait for the story to be made into a feature length motion picture.

I understand there are companies that make movies out of interesting stories.

Yes, there are companies that actually make movies out of interesting stories, like ours. You can check our film list on IMDB.Com

This post has been edited by biographco: Wed 20th February 2008, 3:45pm

[Moulton]

When does casting and shooting start for the fascinating story chronicled in this thread?

[dtobias]

When does casting and shooting start for the fascinating story chronicled in this thread?

As soon as they can line up space on a rocket to the moon in order to get the cast and crew to the shooting location.

[dogbiscuit]

When does casting and shooting start for the fascinating story chronicled in this thread?

As soon as they can line up space on a rocket to the moon in order to get the cast and crew to the shooting location.

Don't mention the moon. I mentioned it once and didn't get away with it.

[dtobias]

Don't mention the moon. I mentioned it once and didn't get away with it.

Because there's no point in sending dogbiscuits to the moon... dogs don't go to the moon, only cows jump over it. Don't you know your nursery rhymes?

[dogbiscuit]

Don't mention the moon. I mentioned it once and didn't get away with it.

Because there's no point in sending dogbiscuits to the moon... dogs don't go to the moon, only cows jump over it. Don't you know your nursery rhymes?

Hmm, you are not keeping up with the times:

More cheese, Gromit?

[Moulton]

What a friend we have in cheeses.

[biographco]

What a friend we have in cheeses.

Moulton, are you an editor at Wikipedia?

When does casting and shooting start for the fascinating story chronicled in this thread?

As soon as they can line up space on a rocket to the moon in order to get the cast and crew to the shooting location.

Don't mention the moon. I mentioned it once and didn't get away with it.

This is very interesting. I bid you all ado, since the genre has changed to a battle of elementary school wits. All this would be alright, if the malice was kept to a blog, rather than an encyclopedia that is proported to be factual.

[Nya]

This is very interesting. I bid you all ado, since the genre has changed to a battle of elementary school wits. All this would be alright, if the malice was kept to a blog, rather than an encyclopedia that is proported to be factual.

Uh, this isn't an encyclopedia - it's a discussion site.

[biographco]

This is very interesting. I bid you all ado, since the genre has changed to a battle of elementary school wits. All this would be alright, if the malice was kept to a blog, rather than an encyclopedia that is proported to be factual.

Uh, this isn't an encyclopedia - it's a discussion site.

Nya, let me clarify. If Wikipedia was as this is a discussion page or "Blog", as WR is, there would be no problem. The problem we have is Wikipedia proporting to be a factual encyclopedia, which is what some of the members here are from Wikipedia and defending it. Thanks :)

[Moulton]

Wikipedia doesn't have editors. It's has players with avatar characters who engage in battle much like any MMPORG. Given that observation, I prefer to play it for laffs.

[biographco]

Wikipedia doesn't have editors. It's has players with avatar characters who engage in battle much like any MMPORG. Given that observation, I prefer to play it for laffs.

Cheers! Well said.

[Moulton]

So, when you turn the Wikipedia Story into a movie, I'd suggest a Noir Comic Opera, along the lines of Rocky Horror Picture Show.