The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Student's Wikipedia hoax quote used worldwide in newspaper obituaries--Irish Times
Rating  4
EricBarbour
post Wed 6th May 2009, 8:37am
Post #1


blah
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am
Member No.: 5,066

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE
A WIKIPEDIA hoax by a 22-year-old Dublin student resulted in a fake quote being published in newspaper obituaries around the world.


I didn't see it in the Newsfeed. Anyone know more?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Son of a Yeti
post Wed 6th May 2009, 12:43pm
Post #2


High altitude member
****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 415
Joined: Sun 26th Oct 2008, 3:30pm
From: A hiding place in the Himalaya
Member No.: 8,704



QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Wed 6th May 2009, 1:37am) *

QUOTE
A WIKIPEDIA hoax by a 22-year-old Dublin student resulted in a fake quote being published in newspaper obituaries around the world.


I didn't see it in the Newsfeed. Anyone know more?


I even could not find a single instance of this quote being used in a context different from describing this "hoax" (I mean in the newsfeeds searched by news.google.com - some blogs did seem to have taken up the bait).

Were they all retracted? 100% of them? Also from Google cache?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
carbuncle
post Wed 6th May 2009, 1:42pm
Post #3


Fat Cat
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,601
Joined: Sun 30th Mar 2008, 4:48pm
Member No.: 5,544



QUOTE(Son of a Yeti @ Wed 6th May 2009, 12:43pm) *

I even could not find a single instance of this quote being used in a context different from describing this "hoax" (I mean in the newsfeeds searched by news.google.com - some blogs did seem to have taken up the bait).

Were they all retracted? 100% of them? Also from Google cache?

The last paragraph of the Guardian's obit:
QUOTE
This article was amended on Friday 3 April 2009. Maurice Jarre died on 28 March 2009, not 29 March. We opened with a quotation which we are now advised had been invented as a hoax, and was never said by the composer: "My life has been one long soundtrack. Music was my life, music brought me to life." The article closed with: "Music is how I will be remembered," said Jarre. "When I die there will be a final waltz playing in my head and that only I can hear." These quotes appear to have originated as a deliberate insertion in the composer's Wikipedia entry in the wake of his death on 28 March, and from there were duplicated on various internet sites. These errors have been corrected.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Somey
post Fri 8th May 2009, 8:52am
Post #4


Can't actually moderate (or even post)
*********

Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,815
Joined: Sat 17th Jun 2006, 7:47pm
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275



Here's the discussion thread on Slashdot. There are some halfway-decent ideas in there, actually, though I'm afraid none of them are coming from the pro-WP crowd, who once again can only manage the usual just-not-getting-it references to "the Nature study," and the standard self-righteous blathering about how "people should just stop vandalizing our website."

I realize Slashdot has one of the biggest user bases of any news/discussion forum on the internet, and I'm also biased... but it just seems to me that when WP-related issues appear on Slashdot, user support is always reflective of the tone and purpose of the original thread-starter. So if someone posts a new story about something embarrassing to WP, people pile on to attack WP, and if someone posts something positive about WP, people pile on to defend WP, usually by attacking its detractors.

Sometimes you see that with stories about Microsoft, Oracle, and Sun/Java, too (and I believe the latter two have now merged, btw). Maybe it's something about the way Slashdot is set up... I've never looked all that closely at their mod-points system, to be honest.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Peter Damian
post Mon 11th May 2009, 5:26pm
Post #5


I have as much free time as a Wikipedia admin!
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,400
Joined: Tue 18th Dec 2007, 9:25pm
Member No.: 4,212

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE
Closing his follow-up report in last Thursday's Irish Times, Fitzgerald raised a worrying question: "If I could so easily falsify the news across the globe, even to this small extent, then it is unnerving to think about what other false information may be reported in the press."


Excellent - except I've gone through all 6 pages and no comments from WR - or have I missed a thread here?

[edit] A moderator moved this post to the right thread. Thanks.

This post has been edited by Peter Damian: Mon 11th May 2009, 5:36pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Peter Damian
post Mon 11th May 2009, 5:37pm
Post #6


I have as much free time as a Wikipedia admin!
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,400
Joined: Tue 18th Dec 2007, 9:25pm
Member No.: 4,212

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Somey @ Fri 8th May 2009, 9:52am) *

Here's the discussion thread on Slashdot. There are some halfway-decent ideas in there, actually, though I'm afraid none of them are coming from the pro-WP crowd, who once again can only manage the usual just-not-getting-it references to "the Nature study," and the standard self-righteous blathering about how "people should just stop vandalizing our website."


Eh? But then when you point out the problem with a reference work 'anyone can edit' they tell you there are no problems.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Peter Damian
post Mon 11th May 2009, 5:55pm
Post #7


I have as much free time as a Wikipedia admin!
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,400
Joined: Tue 18th Dec 2007, 9:25pm
Member No.: 4,212

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Here is the exact sequence

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=280527998 2:29, 30 March 2009 86.42.227.123 inserts fake quote

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=280626742 11:51, 30 March 2009 (edit) (undo)Cosprings reverts

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=280648942 14:13, 30 March 2009 (edit) (undo)86.42.227.123 tries again

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=280865419 15:07, 31 March 2009 (edit) (undo) Cosprings reverts - with the comment 'no unsourced quotes'. Interesting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=280872760 17:03, 31 March 2009 (edit) (undo)86.42.227.123 tries again

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=280893979 17:09, 31 March 2009 (edit) (undo)Bongomatic

10 out of 10 for an inventive and plausible quote. 0 out of 10 for not giving a plausible fake citation (which no one checks at all).

This post has been edited by Peter Damian: Mon 11th May 2009, 5:57pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Somey
post Mon 11th May 2009, 6:27pm
Post #8


Can't actually moderate (or even post)
*********

Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,815
Joined: Sat 17th Jun 2006, 7:47pm
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275



QUOTE(Peter Damian @ Mon 11th May 2009, 12:26pm) *
Excellent - except I've gone through all 6 pages and no comments from WR - or have I missed a thread here?

Eh wot? hmmm.gif

Speaking only for myself, I'm much more interested in the reactions of Slashdotters to WP-related issues than I am in trying to debate the scientific merit of "editing experiments" involving the deliberate insertion of false information into some WP article... To participate in the discussion would be violating the "Prime Directive," from my personal perspective - it's essentially the same reason I don't edit Wikipedia itself. For me, it's basically a gigantic behavioral test tube.

There are also real-life issues to consider - even if Jarre's family wasn't particularly offended by that particular fake quote, they might still be offended by people defending this person's "right" (or other justification) to add it in. Of course, nobody has written more fake quotes than yours truly, but those are in Uncyclopedia, where they belong - not Wikipedia, where they don't.

Anyway, the "accuracy issue" is a red herring as far as I'm concerned. It's probably much more important to you (i.e., Peter) because you're a highly-qualified academic in an area that WP does especially poorly in. But ultimately it's just a recruitment strategy for them, just like the fundamentally silly "inclusionism vs. deletionism debate." People get hooked by the arguing and drama, the gamesmanship, and the need to defend, defend, defend. It's no way to build an encyclopedia, but it's certainly been a good way to expand the user-base.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Milton Roe
post Mon 11th May 2009, 6:42pm
Post #9


Known alias of J. Random Troll
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined: Thu 28th Feb 2008, 1:03am
Member No.: 5,156

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Wed 6th May 2009, 1:37am) *

QUOTE
A WIKIPEDIA hoax by a 22-year-old Dublin student resulted in a fake quote being published in newspaper obituaries around the world.


I didn't see it in the Newsfeed. Anyone know more?

It's in newsfeed today with a vengeance.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
victim of censorship
post Tue 12th May 2009, 3:01pm
Post #10


Not all thugs are Wikipediots, but all Wikipediots are thugs.
******

Group: Contributors
Posts: 1,148
Joined: Tue 6th Jan 2009, 8:33am
From: The SOCK HOP
Member No.: 9,640



MORE BULLSHIT FROM THE LAND OF WIKI
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SirFozzie
post Tue 12th May 2009, 3:44pm
Post #11


Über Member
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 806
Joined: Thu 29th Mar 2007, 3:32pm
Member No.: 1,200

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Welcome to two weeks ago, Joey.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
victim of censorship
post Tue 12th May 2009, 6:47pm
Post #12


Not all thugs are Wikipediots, but all Wikipediots are thugs.
******

Group: Contributors
Posts: 1,148
Joined: Tue 6th Jan 2009, 8:33am
From: The SOCK HOP
Member No.: 9,640



QUOTE(SirFozzie @ Tue 12th May 2009, 3:44pm) *

Welcome to two weeks ago, Joey.


WELCOME TO YAHOO TODAY...
Note date...MAY 11... The wiki house fire is burning bright tonight


This should be a little dent in the Juice wiki got as far as fund raising...

Any one that gives money to Wikipedia now only helps funds Big SUE Gardner's 450K /year stipend.

Yahoo... let the truth about wiki and the sociopaths who run, admins and game wiki be outed and shown the lieing thugs they are.


I love you too.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SirFozzie
post Tue 12th May 2009, 7:28pm
Post #13


Über Member
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 806
Joined: Thu 29th Mar 2007, 3:32pm
Member No.: 1,200

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Poor Joey. Missed all the ones praising Wikipedia for getting rid of the false quote, which the newspapers didn't do till a month later.

Early onset of Alzheimer's maybe....
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18th 9 14, 7:39am