Wikipedia creator Jimmy Wales has been accused of agreeing to edit a page on the online encyclopaedia in exchange for a donation.
Former Novell chief scientist Jeffrey Merkey says he donated $5,000 to the Wikimedia Foundation in exchange for changes to his Wikipedia entry.
Mr Merkey says Mr Wales agreed to “use his influence” to remove libellous remarks in the entry.
In response, Mr Wales has called the allegations “nonsense”.
The edit history of the page does show changes made by Jimmy Wales and that the page was “protected”, so that no further edits can be made by the public.
I rarely use Wikipedia – so, what’s your opinion?
“remove libellous remarks” And the problem is?
>> “remove libellous remarks” And the problem is?
The problem is pretty clear, isn’t it?
Wikipedia is supposed to be self-correcting by the participants. It’s a core concept behind the whole wiki thang.
To do it top-down and then lock-it is a huge problem. To do it for a donation is a complete repudiation of the Wiki philosophy.
#2 “Wikipedia is supposed to be self-correcting by the participants.”
Doesn’t sound like the “self-correcting” mechanism was working…
Wikipedia was good for a moment but now most of it is just celebrity gossip and half truths.
I’ve checked plenty of records that seem to support only one side of the story. The side that the “wikipedia” editors want to push.
I see this as nothing different. Wikipedia is really nothing more than a joke to me with mostly fake stories that are no different than half the media that never cover the whole story.
Wikipedia is really nothing more than a joke to me with mostly fake stories that are no different than half the media that never cover the whole story.
For example?
I’m curious… I don’t explore that many topics that would lend themselves to opinion. I’ve found the scientific-type entries to be pretty useful.
My opinion is. Jeffrey Merkey is either an idiot or a liar. Or maybe the article is false.
What are Merkey’s motivations for coming out with this bad thing he has done?
“What are Merkey’s motivations for coming out with this GOOD thing he has done?”
Fixed
275m a day for the war effort
5,000 for an untraceable database update effort
1,000/hour for a prostitute & career busting effort
I’m sure Wikipedia will have interesting information on the Eliot Spitzer web page, since he won’t have any cash left to clean up his page.
Or his life.
Here’s where Wikipedia is useful.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silda_Wall_Spitzer
Silda Alice Wall Spitzer (born December 10, 1957 in Chapel Hill, North Carolina) is the founder and chair of the board of Children for Children, a not-for-profit organization that fosters community involvement and social responsibility in young people.
So Eliot has a Woody Allen.
moral of the story: Anyone who thinks wikipedia is a viable source of info is dumber then a rock. And this is just another piece of proof
I have no problem with this IF the site were still open for changes. If not then the disclaimer should be clearly listed on the site itself.
The founder should play bey the rules he sets himself unless he excludes himself (which he can of course do) it should however be transparent.
Wikipedia is neat and doesn’t Jimmy look sweet in his new pirate costume. But kidding aside, there’s an old adage in politics, when someone calls you bad names it means that you’re in someone else’s way.
To the Luddites out there, Wikipedia IS a useful source. It is not the most rock solid though. Most articles are written by experts and checked by knowledgeable people. It is usually only the more contentious articles that are hacked and untrustworthy.
Anyone interested in having their wikipedia entry changed can contact me autocatcar@gmail.com. I have some very affordable solutions.
# 4 PJAM3 said, on March 12th, 2008 at 9:06 am
>> Wikipedia was good for a moment but now most of it is just celebrity gossip and half truths.
I still use Wikipedia a lot and find it pretty-darn-informative for everything accept controversial topics.
I don’t take it as gospel truth, of course.
But I have completely quit contributing to it. (I used to be fairly active.) The active wiki people can be such jerks.