Zionist groups launch Wikipedia editing campaign

[ZeroSignal]

Palestinians prepare to battle 'Zionist editing' on Wikipedia - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

Wikipedia editing courses launched by Zionist groups | World news | The Guardian

Well, this is not going to end well. I see another Scientology Vs. Wikipedia type debacle coming soon to an Internets near you...

EDIT:
Some excellent comments on this subject in this article:
http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/20...e-that-aims-for-balanced-and-zionist-entries/

 

[pink freud]

Idiots don't know that pages can be locked from editing, and pages that get edited in a rapid succession get alerts sent out.

 

[synrgy]

Idiots don't know that pages can be locked from editing, and pages that get edited in a rapid succession get alerts sent out.

Seemed like a no brainer to me.

 

[Origin]

I don't get how people can ever believe in anything that is that fucking asinine. I guess I can understand wanting to believe in God and the other standard religions that would almost make sense if they were true, but...this is RETARDED. As in, inexcusable. I..goddammit

 

[Xaios]

Why is this news? People vandalize and screw with Wikipedia articles all the time. Just about any divisive figure will have to deal with this kind of thing. How many people do you think have vandalized George W. Bush's wikipedia page? Bottom line is that you NEVER use Wikipedia as a legitimate source of information for politically charged content. It's like that episode of American Dad when Steve says "if only there was a place where you could make outrageous claims with absolutely no proof and people would believe you." Next screen? Wikipedia.

 

[ZeroSignal]

Why is this news? People vandalize and screw with Wikipedia articles all the time. Just about any divisive figure will have to deal with this kind of thing. How many people do you think have vandalized George W. Bush's wikipedia page? Bottom line is that you NEVER use Wikipedia as a legitimate source of information for politically charged content. It's like that episode of American Dad when Steve says "if only there was a place where you could make outrageous claims with absolutely no proof and people would believe you." Next screen? Wikipedia.

It's not about one or two guys messing with a page or some channers "hurrdurr"-ing their way across Wikipedia. This is a deliberate, orchestrated action to spread misinformation by using a very regularly consulted information dispensing website. Whether or not it's academic is irrelevant because for many people (myself included) it is the first stop when wanting to learn more about a given subject. This is an excellent quote on this exact topic:

Of course there are small, loosely defined groups of individuals who edit Wikipedia in a manner congruent with their own ideological predispositions; no one who has spent any amount of time on Wikipedia can deny that. However, these editorial cliques don’t openly recruit or hold seminars on how they can make Wikipedia conform more closely to their perspective, which is precisely what this article draws to our attention. In my opinion, that is what makes this case newsworthy and, indeed, unsettling. [...]

This belies a larger difficulty in contemporary media, one hinted at by [the] phrase “balanced and Zionist in nature.” There is an assumption that any ’story’ can be approached from two perspectives and that the goal of the media is represent a ‘balance’ between the two, as opposed to attempting to get at the truth. Liberal/conservative, Israeli/Palestinian, science/religion: you’re either with us or against us. According to this binary logic, a story or article that does not reflect one perspective is taken to be sympathetic to the other, which therefore calls for the intervention of the ‘wronged’ party. This is the rationale that has splintered contemporary media into hostile, mutually exclusive camps catering to niche audiences who want their own ideas parroted back at them as news.

This is, of course, completely antithetical to the mission of Wikipedia, which is to provide accessible and accurate information that anyone and everyone can meaningfully contribute to. Indeed, one might even argue that efforts such as the one discussed in this post actively subvert and devalue Wikipedia, as edit wars push articles further and further into conflict between interest groups and away from a consensus-based, democratic approach. [...]

If individual Zionists wish to edit Wikipedia, more power to them. They are welcome to contribute and I’m sure they have interesting information and perspectives to offer. However, to recruit blocs of new editors based on their ideological positions instead of their expertise or commitment to the ideals embodied by Wikipedia is to subvert the site’s very project and ought to be viewed as what it is: an assault on those of us who want to build the most coherent, consensus based approach to information sharing by partisans convinced solely of their own opinions.

 

[Demiurge]

The organisiers of the Wikipedia courses, are already planning a competition to find the "Best Zionist editor", with a prize of a hot-air balloon trip over Israel.

I'm in!

 

[Prydogga]

Hail Xenu!

 

[leandroab]

I guess they did this then?

 

[clouds]

I love it when people edit Wikipedia like in the above post .