False Fact On Wikipedia Proves Itself

An anonymous reader writes "Germany has a new minister of economic affairs. Mr. von und zu Guttenberg is descended from an old and noble lineage, so his official name is very long: Karl Theodor Maria Nikolaus Johann Jacob Philipp Franz Joseph Sylvester Freiherr von und zu Guttenberg. When first there were rumors that he would be appointed to the post, someone changed his Wikipedia entry and added the name 'Wilhelm,' so Wikipedia stated his full name as: Karl Theodor Maria Nikolaus Johann Jacob Philipp Wilhelm Franz Joseph Sylvester Freiherr von und zu Guttenberg. What resulted from this edit points up a big problem for our information society (in German; Google translation). The German and international press picked up the wrong name from Wikipedia — including well-known newspapers, Internet sites, and TV news such as spiegel.de, Bild, heute.de, TAZ, or Süddeutsche Zeitung. In the meantime, the change on Wikipedia was reverted, with a request for proof of the name. The proof was quickly found. On spiegel.de an article cites Mr. von und zu Guttenberg using his 'full name'; however, while the quote might have been real, the full name seems to have been looked up on Wikipedia while the false edit was in place. So the circle was closed: Wikipedia states a false fact, a reputable media outlet copies the false fact, and this outlet is then used as the source to prove the false fact to Wikipedia."

Comments

1984?

[betterunixthanunix]

Wikipedia now creates the truth. If they say 2+2=5, then 2+2=5. You will learn to love Big Wiki.

Re:1984?

[NorQue]

Oh, Wikipedia is dead wrong in this case. According to Google 2 + 2 equals 4.

Re:1984?

[Mylakovich]

You missed the joke. It was pretty subtle, though.

Re:1984?

[Dog-Cow]

Der Spiegel is not a scholarly journal, either. It also cannot be taken as a primary source of information.

I take exception to the idea that only scholarly journals may be primary sources of information.

Your attitude sucks.

Re:1984?

[dmesg0]

If you need anyone to tell you that it was a joke, you need to go back to being an ovum and pick a different sperm cell.

Re:1984?

[linhares]

I take exception to the idea that only scholarly journals may be primary sources of information. Your attitude sucks.

[citation needed]

Re:1984?

[bhsx]

Here ya go!

Re:1984?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, 1 + 1 = 10.
No kidding.

Re:1984?

[MrNaz]

You could assassinate him, and then check his tombstone. I'm pretty sure they'd get it right there.

Re:1984?

[MrNaz]

That analogy makes sense like baked clams on a toilet seat.

Re:1984?

[penguinstorm]

I, for one, welcome our new Wikipedian overlords.

Re:1984?

[eln]

He means a true scholar will hunt down and kill anyone who misinterprets his work.

Re:1984?

[Scrameustache]

you need to go to primary sources.

You mean like the actual fucking person the article is about? Oh wait, Wikipedia doesn't consider the actual fucking person to be a "primary source"!

The primary source would be his mom ;-|

Re:1984?

[Chris Burke]

That's odd. I always though America's Funniest Home Videos was an insightful commentary on inherent masculine insecurities, and the fear that no matter how strong and capable we may try to appear, someone will find and exploit our vulnerabilities and reduce us to the weeping man-child that we all secretly fear we are deep inside.

And that the someone will be a 1st grader with a whiffle-ball bat.

But maybe I'm reading too much into the show.

Re:1984?

[Hordeking]

Excuse me? Wikipedia is a lot worse than it is. (See article.)

So, to put this statement into perspective, you're saying that x!=x.

How could anything be anything other than what it is? Whatever it is, that is what it is, neither more, nor less, than what it is.

Of course, it all depends on what the meaning of the word is is.

Re:1984?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you want a well-researched and well-written encyclopedia, go buy the Encyclopedia Britannica.

If you want an encyclopedia that offers a good overview of the nuances of spoken Klingon, visit Wikipedia.

There. Fixed that for ya.

He's lucky anyway

[Enleth]

Knowing what some journalists are capable (or rather incapable) of, I'd not be surprised if they had quoted him stating that his name is "Karl Theodor [citation needed] von un zu Guttenberg"...

Re:He's lucky anyway

[snspdaarf]

Johann Gambolputty de von Ausfern schplenden schlitter crasscrenbon fried digger dingle dangle dongle dungle burstein von knacker thrasher apple banger horowitz ticolensic grander knotty spelltinkle grandlich grumblemeyer spelterwasser kurstlich himbleeisen bahnwagen gutenabend bitte ein neurnburger bratwustle gerspurten mitz weimache luber hundsfut gumberaber shonedanker kalbsfleisch mittler aucher von Hautkopft of Ulm

He will just have to..

[Dynamoo]

He will just have to change his name so it matches Wikipedia. Problem solved.

Re:He will just have to..

[jsiren]

Under a tombstone that says [citation needed]?

The only one missing

[rjmx]

Whoever added it probably did so because it was the only possible male name he didn't have.

Ahhhhh ... completeness achieved.

ObPython

[Chris Tucker]

Maria Nikolaus Johann Jacob Philipp Wilhelm Franz Joseph Sylvester Freiherr von und zu Guttenberg, of Ulm.

Obligatory Python reference

[Einmaliger]

Why is it that the world never remembered the name of Karl Theodor Maria Nikolaus Johann Jacob Philipp Franz Joseph Sylvester Freiherr von und zu Guttenberg?

Re:This is a story?

[Stray7Xi]

Little known fact, Jesus actually had a mohawk. Now I'm off to fix his wikipedia entry.

Re:Noble lineage

[Anonymous Coward]

Is he a relative of Johann Gambolputty de von Ausfern Schplenden Schlitter Crasscrenbon Fried Digger Dangle Dungle Burstein von Knacker Thrasher Apple Banger Horowitz Ticolensic Grander Knotty Spelltinkle Grandlich Grumblemeyer Spelterwasser Kürstlich Wilhelm Himbleeisen Bahnwagen Gutenabend Bitte Eine Nürnburger Bratwustle Gerspurten mit Zweimache Luber Hundsfut Gumberaber Shönendanker Kalbsfleisch Mittler Raucher von Hautkopft of Ulm?

Fixed that for you, see Wikipedia if you are confused. Feel free to cite this post.

Re:Nothing new

[History's Coming To]

Not forgetting the fact that God (take your pick) doesn't meet the notability criteria...

Re:Cryptographic hashes

[gzipped_tar]

Dear 2619601604C639867C95D816A5E1A1FA,

Unsurprisingly, it appears that md5("ewg") = 2619601604C639867C95D816A5E1A1FA (as verified by echo -n "ewg" | md5sum ).

You should have used a salt. And a better hash function.

Signed,

5fb72929dc95aa57fb6b30652777b6
aba0299f5548fb3e685e22598d8440
d4ef6fd35e1558beb9fb1533a52dbf
9ecd99b411d36f3bbf737a5db36765
eb67a903

Re:Nothing new

[bruthasj]

Yes. Right here: http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1123229&cid=26811271

Or, as some like to call it...

[F-3582]

Prior Art®