It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The mystery of the missing Wikipedia page

page: 3
65
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by rival
en.wikipedia.org...

2nd line


You've set up a target for disgruntled former staff and members and anyone seeking to defame, discredit and trash ATS.

It's non-existence there to begin with is not a conspiracy, just an example of how fallible Wikipedia can be.

Enjoy the show.




posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 10:48 AM
link   
What is Wiki? I'm amazed people even use this sight for a real
source of accurate information. Open editing? That's accurate.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by keithallenlaw
What is Wiki? I'm amazed people even use this sight for a real
source of accurate information. Open editing? That's accurate.


Exactly!

ATS is?

Fill in the forms with whatever you (or anyone) wants there.

Seriously, anyone should be able to see exactly why ATS had no page there to begin with.

If it gets deleted, it would be no surprise if it is removed by request of ATS admin.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by keithallenlaw
 

It's more accurate than most people give it credit for. All articles concerning major events, inventions, people, etc are moderated and locked, usually by moderators or administrators of the site. Not to mention the fact that every article needs to have reliable sources to back up it's information and claims.

[edit on 8-8-2010 by MisterMan]



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpartanKingLeonidas
reply to post by WolfofWar
 


The simple answer is that they see ATS as competition.

Advertising.

Making information allowable to all the populace.

And never forget they might be getting pressured by Government.

We had a TinWiki here on ATS and it crashed.

Mysteriously.


If you are as big and noticable as WIKI is, then the government has already contacted you...

Google, Yahoo, probably WIKI, considering they already censor the news/media, this wouldn't even be that bad for them......


desperate times bring desperate measures....

gov = desperate for attention and control ???

and btw I'm not against government.....we need one.....just not a really controlling one.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by tauristercus
Just out of curiousity, I also searched for a Wiki entry for GodLike Productions ... no mention of them either ... so ATS is not being singled out primarily.


en.wikipedia.org...

The sad thing is, both ATS and GLP (who i loathe as much as bad astronomy) have no article. Yet NAMBLA does.

How predictable that child molesting is a more acceptable viewpoint than conspiracy theory.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 11:10 AM
link   
The wiki article is under "Above Top Secret", shouldn't it be under "AboveTopSecret.com"? Also someone needs to add some sources or it's not going to stay up very long.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by WolfofWar
en.wikipedia.org...

Made a page. To say it needs work is the understatement of a century. If anybody wants to get on it go. I would like to see how long it takes before it's removed.



Something to note: John Lear had a Wiki until around the same time, and it was deleted. Noticed you cited him in your stub.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 11:12 AM
link   
There was a thread about this a while back, and the reason, (if I remember correctly) the page was taken down was because banned members were continually attacking it.

I dont remember all the details, but the owners at one point wanted the page down, then said they would support the creation of a new page.

But, it was not some outside shadowy force that prevented ATS from having a page. It was pissed off people who continually attacked the page that got the page taken down.

I am surprised no one from staff here has posted in this thread yet. They would have more details and a better memory of it than I do.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 11:16 AM
link   
This is the most ridiculous paranoia I have ever seen. Wikipedia doesn't think ATS is notable. There's no conspiracy. They aren't opposed to ATS as an alternative information source, because Wikipedia doesn't directly make any money; they don't advertise and they do not require paid subscriptions. They make all their money through donations, and having competing sources of information, especially one as disorganized as ATS, would do them absolutely no harm. As for worries about censorship or the feds trying to keep us hidden, you can just as easily google "Above top secret" and come straight here.

I respect your desire to make a wikipedia article about ATS; I simultaneously mock your paranoia about the need to do so.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 11:23 AM
link   
In my opinion, wikileaks is working against the freedom of the internet. Our government will use this as a prime example as why to have censored internet. Is wikileaks a cia operation to limit the internet by realsing what seems to be not that important documents. We may think of them as great docs being released, but maybe they really arent.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 11:24 AM
link   
Perhaps abotetopsecret has enemies from other sites that want to limit them for competitive reasons or who knows. Some people will I am sure use their little editor soapbox on wikipedia to keep down someone they feel threatened by competitively.

Read this short thread on a competing site. ATS Disinfo There seems to be people hostile to ATS for what ever reason. Why would not one such person if they happen to be a wikipedia editor use that position to keep ATS off of the site?



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by logicalthinking
 


Perhaps you should edit that into the Wikipedia page about Wikileaks.

Two entirely separate organizations, you know.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by logicalthinking
In my opinion, wikileaks is working against the freedom of the internet. Our government will use this as a prime example as why to have censored internet. Is wikileaks a cia operation to limit the internet by realsing what seems to be not that important documents. We may think of them as great docs being released, but maybe they really arent.




Too funny!

This is why I love ATS, there really is a time and place for everything here, even when it is misplaced.




posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 11:40 AM
link   
I suggest to someone that is good at this to cross reference to the Above Top Secret article in other articles.

Like in the Jim Marrs article, put in a little note that he 'has collaborated closely with the freethinking conspiracy discussion website, Above Top Secret.com, using a similar name for his book Above Top Secret.'

Or if George Knapp has a wiki page... include that 'Mark from Above Top Secret helped to break the BP/Mustang Story that was featured on Issues with Jane Valequez or whatever her name is


Good idea for a thread, OP.




posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Good Catch WolfofWar, Very good catch, I would think ATS could be seen on Wiki Project Paranormal, but nope....

I think I know the reason why we are deleted. Members here are intelligent enough to read between the lines on news articles and will question everything.

Doing this makes us a high profile target to the Gov't Higher ups. Wikipedia is especially popular to the enslaved masses... and they themselves use it as they're back door encyclopedia. I guess they don't want the status quo to change

Fox



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
You've set up a target for disgruntled former staff and members and anyone seeking to defame, discredit and trash ATS.


I'm pretty sure that is the exact reason why the Wikipedia page kept disappearing. I believe that back in 2006 I was still a regular at this institution and maybe even a staff member.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 11:59 AM
link   
IDK what the problem is?

It seemed pretty clear they don't want sites that post news stories from other sites.

Granted, some people make their own threads here, but the vast majority are taken from other sites to begin with.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by WolfofWar
 


Wow, I never noticed this before. I've never even heard of Wkipedia removing a page, but I also never really use Wikipedia to begin with...



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 12:07 PM
link   
The page is already slathered with little Wiki warnings.


This article may not meet the general notability guideline. Please help to establish notability by adding reliable, secondary sources about the topic. If notability cannot be established, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted. (August 2010)


That was rather quick. I just noticed, as was stated before on the thread, John Lear was also removed. Interesting considering he is pretty damn notable of a person.

It does appear that somebody is attempting to remove "alternative news" people and the like off Wiki.



new topics

top topics



 
65
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join