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

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

> Help

This subforum is for critical evaluation of Wikipedia articles. However, to reduce topic-bloat, please make note of exceptionally poor stubs, lists, and other less attention-worthy material in the Miscellaneous Grab Bag thread. Also, please be aware that agents of the Wikimedia Foundation might use your evaluations to improve the articles in question.

Useful Links: Featured Article CandidatesFeatured Article ReviewArticles for DeletionDeletion Review

> Biograph Company, Open slander and harrassment
biographco
post Fri 30th March 2007, 1:54am
Post #1


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 104
Joined: Thu 29th Mar 2007, 9:03pm
From: Los Angeles, CA.
Member No.: 1,201

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



First, I want to thank the editors of the blog and say that there is such a need for this forum about Wikipedia, since this so called "Encyclopedia" is crawled by many other information websites and so many editors on Wikipedia truly have an agenda that is unfair and biased.

My company is a small independent film company and had been on Wikipedia for quite awhile with an article. Our company is a very old company, and has an exemplary reputation. We did not even post the first article but one of the Wiki-members did. The first article was fine and fairly accurate. However, in 2004 after our monument in Hollywood event, one editor appeared and became malicious with intent to harm the reputation of the company. This "Editor" also had a certain group of "Editors" that knew this person or he/she recruited them in an effort to discredit our company, and supply false information. We feel this was a personal attack and intent on harming the company's reputation for certain reasons.

At the time, I was not that familiar with Wikipedia guidelines or standards, and one of our VP's was extremely upset and dared to defy this "Editor". This VP who had a previous Wikipedia account was promptly blocked. I admit our VP did go against some Wiki-policies. Our attorney then attempted to call and contact Wikipedia to resolve the issue, but without results. The article was further re-written, including ambiguous information and intentional inclusions to make the company look "Ridiculous" which is actually posted IN WRITING by one of the administrators, yes, that this was their intent and goal. Since this, we have not attempted to change anything, in-process of legal proceedings according to state and federal law.

We also noticed that some other members of Wikipedia who were trying to correct the article contacted us on our information. These other editors also discovered that their was malicious intent against us, and were blocked as well by this other coalition of editors determined to discredit the company. This information we know of because of the blocked editors contacting our office.

We also was recently hacked and even embezzlement of funds occurred by hacking that coincide with recent Wikipedia activity against the company. This has been already reported to the proper authorities, and we believe it may have been a Wikipedia person involved in this slanderous effort.

Unfortunately, anyone attempting to correct the article about us is "Blocked" or "Banned". A monopoly of only a few associated editors now is able to include any false or harmful information without recourse. With this in mind, we have several options that we are in the process of initiating against Wikipedia and the foundation, some of it possibly criminal.

It is sad that Wikipedia is a great idea but is monopolized and used for personal and sometimes hateful agendas against others without provocation. We want to make everyone aware of this and maybe this can be stopped before Wikipedia finally pushed too far, and will eventually be shut down for inappropriate activity.

Please feel free to check out the Wikipedia article under "American_Mutoscope_and_Biograph_Company" and also read the "Talk" sections as well as the archive sections. We also encourage any kind of input on this subject.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Replies
Toledo
post Sun 1st April 2007, 12:44am
Post #2


Neophyte


Group: Contributors
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat 31st Mar 2007, 5:37pm
Member No.: 1,212



In the part of the Wikipedia article about your company, what is incorrect or slanderous?

This post has been edited by Toledo: Sun 1st April 2007, 3:43am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
biographco
post Thu 5th April 2007, 3:52am
Post #3


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 104
Joined: Thu 29th Mar 2007, 9:03pm
From: Los Angeles, CA.
Member No.: 1,201

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Toledo @ Sat 31st March 2007, 5:44pm) *

In the part of the Wikipedia article about your company, what is incorrect or slanderous?

It is in the "Talk" section of the article.

QUOTE(Somey @ Sat 31st March 2007, 9:21pm) *

QUOTE(anon1234 @ Sat 31st March 2007, 5:57pm) *
Typical distortion. I notice they are associating the legal threats as coming from WR proper, but we are not an organization with the ability to file lawsuits as a group, but rather a message board in which many people from diverse groups can post...

I know! Do they think we're forming a corporation or something? It's ludicrous. (But hardly surprising...)

Besides, their definition of "legal threat" pretty much means anything in which the word "legal" is included in a sentence. Pointing out legislation that might affect the content of an article is a "legal threat." Vaguely noting that the foundation might be sued for libelous content is a "legal threat." The entire WP:NLT policy is just a blinkering mechanism that lets them pretend that nothing they do ever has consequences. That, too, is ludicrous.

QUOTE(Toledo @ Sat 31st March 2007, 6:44pm) *
In the part of the Wikipedia article about your company, what is incorrect or slanderous?

Looks like much of the dispute was over the relationship of the modern company with the original...? The WP folks would probably have treated them much better if they'd named it "The American Mutant Biology Company" instead. smile.gif

Actually, I may use that for my own next company...

By the way, welcome to the forum, Toledo! We were sort of hoping for Cleveland, but I suspect you'll do just fine for now!

Hey how about Mutantpedia! lol we have to throw a joke in:) Seriously, go through our website it is documented we are the same company, and it was revived, verified and recorded.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
biographco   Biograph Company   Fri 30th March 2007, 1:54am
anon1234   It's standard practice for editors and adminis...   Fri 30th March 2007, 2:51am
biographco   It's standard practice for editors and admini...   Fri 30th March 2007, 12:16pm
anon1234   From AN/I: Typical distortion. I notice they ar...   Sat 31st March 2007, 11:57pm
Somey   By far! I found this archived AN entry. Shoul...   Fri 30th March 2007, 4:45am
biographco   In the part of the Wikipedia article about your c...   Thu 5th April 2007, 5:41am
Kathryn Cramer   In the part of the Wikipedia article about your ...   Thu 5th April 2007, 10:42am
Somey   Typical distortion. I notice they are associating...   Sun 1st April 2007, 4:21am
guy   By the way, welcome to the forum, Toledo! We ...   Sun 1st April 2007, 12:47pm
Somey   Cleveland is in North-East England and Toledo is i...   Sun 1st April 2007, 4:00pm
Toledo   That whole business about building a studio lot on...   Sun 1st April 2007, 5:44pm
Somey   ...The property deed on the moon is valid. Branson...   Sun 1st April 2007, 8:58pm
biographco   ...The property deed on the moon is valid. Branso...   Thu 5th April 2007, 3:29am
biographco   [quote name='guy' post='26444' date='Sun 1st Apri...   Thu 5th April 2007, 3:48am
Toledo   On "Building" a studio lot, no such thin...   Thu 5th April 2007, 3:56am
biographco   [quote name='anon1234' post='26423' date='Sat 31s...   Thu 5th April 2007, 4:08am
Toledo   Most states have a statute of limitations on libel...   Sun 1st April 2007, 5:04pm
biographco   Most states have a statute of limitations on libe...   Thu 5th April 2007, 8:22pm
Toledo   The article is libelous because it presents inaccu...   Fri 6th April 2007, 12:40am
biographco   The article is libelous because it presents inacc...   Fri 6th April 2007, 2:53am
Toledo   Libel under Florida law is a civil tort, not a cri...   Thu 5th April 2007, 3:49am
Toledo   I've read through all the discussion page (inc...   Thu 5th April 2007, 9:44am
biographco   I've read through all the discussion page (in...   Sat 7th April 2007, 3:42am
biographco   I've read through all the discussion page (in...   Sat 7th April 2007, 7:08pm
biographco   I've read through all the discussion page (in...   Sat 7th April 2007, 11:58pm
Toledo   Because of time constraints, I cannot give you the...   Sun 8th April 2007, 2:54am
biographco   Because of time constraints, I cannot give you th...   Sun 8th April 2007, 4:40am
biographco   I've read through all the discussion page (in...   Sun 8th April 2007, 12:35pm
dtobias   "I think it's obviously an attempt at se...   Sun 8th April 2007, 4:10pm
biographco   [quote name='biographco' post='27109' date='Sun 8...   Sun 8th April 2007, 7:29pm
biographco   [quote name='biographco' post='27109' date='Sun ...   Tue 10th April 2007, 9:27pm
Somey   Bingo! Couldn't have said it better muh...   Thu 5th April 2007, 3:28pm
biographco   Bingo! Couldn't have said it better muh...   Thu 5th April 2007, 8:08pm
biographco   Bingo! Couldn't have said it better muh...   Sun 8th April 2007, 12:11am
Uly   There's a saying in the legal profession: ...   Fri 6th April 2007, 2:27pm
Cedric   There's a saying in the legal profession: ...   Fri 6th April 2007, 5:27pm
Toledo   62A Am. Jur. 2d Privacy ยง 128: Restatement (Secon...   Sat 7th April 2007, 1:51am
Toledo   One comment from one editor = "they mention i...   Sat 7th April 2007, 8:08pm


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: 25th 2 18, 9:32pm