Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Register Exposes More Wikipedia Abuse

Posted by Zonk on from the it's-the-internet-how-could-there-not-be-drama dept.

cyofee writes "The Register has up another article exposing abuse of Wikipedia's policies and processes. It tells a tale of a man, Gary Weiss, controlling the Wikipedia article about himself and his enemies (one of Wikipedia's biggest taboos) all under the blessing of the Wikipedia Cabal. A man who attempted to expose the affair on Wikipedia, along with his his entire IP range (some 1000 homes), was permanently blocked. This comes only days after the affair of the Secret Mailing list."

5 of 524 comments (clear)

  1. FrstGnn by Helen+Keller · · Score: -1, Troll

    gnnPISS.

    --
    Have you read my blog? Neither have I.
  2. Re:Thanks by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1, Troll

    A good idea corrupted by human execution.

    There is this thing called "Grammar" which tells me that the above sentence completely lacks meaning, as it has no subject. I'll assume you're talking about WP.

    Let's explore this idea of "human execution." What type of execution are you saying would be better? Not many projects of this sort that aren't executed by humans, at least in our experience, and it turns out that a number of human executed projects (including WP) have turned out pretty well, so human influence is not obviously all-corrupting. Also, it turns out that corruption isn't exactly a slippery slope...Even if you become corrupt, you don't have to stay that way.

    So basically you wrote a sentence fragment that paraphrases a fatuous truism. That's fine. The problem is when you then turn around and complain because someone "stole your idea" when they actually write something that's not so non-specific as to be meaningless. That's pretty lame.

    --
    ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  3. Wasn't trying to inform by nunyadambinness · · Score: -1, Troll
    You should fuck off. Now. I'd enjoy it if you tried it.

    Slashdot is not the place for subtle subtext and prose.


    I had no idea there were rules to what could be posted.

    Oh there aren't.

    Like I said, fuck off.

    The respondent posted his reply because he's a shameless karma whore who doesn't have any ideas of his own


    Fixed that for you.

    Now get to fucking off.
  4. You're wrong and a liar now by nunyadambinness · · Score: -1, Troll

    There is this thing called "Grammar" which tells me that the above sentence completely lacks meaning


    Then you shoudl use this thing called "intelligence" as it would help you understand you're wrong.

    The problem is when you then turn around and complain because someone "stole your idea"


    Please show me where I said anything of the kind. I did not EVER claim anyone "stole my idea", and your use of the quotatition marks indicates that you were quoting me, so prove it.

    Oh wait, you were lying and I never said that.

    That's pretty lame.

    Now you know how I feel about everything you've ever posted.
  5. Re:Throwing the baby out with the bathwater by Torodung · · Score: 0, Troll

    Shows how highly you think of Wiki, eh?

    I think Wiki has a good deal of credibility, and the Register slightly less. That still means the Register has a pretty good record, but contains, like Wiki, the odd spurious hack job.

    Stop thinking in dualities. There's a whole spectrum of quality to work with. Saying an entity has less credibility doesn't mean it has NO credibility. Just less.

    --
    Toro