Wikipedia

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 10 2013 @ 01:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Davian
Wikipedia is full of lies and government propaganda.


care to list some of these lies or government propaganda? Unless....


Why not correct the obvious blatant lies and replace with solid sourced fact.


So show us some of these blatant lies....


I know of several,


So why not tell is then?




posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 04:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by Davian
Wikipedia is full of lies and government propaganda.


care to list some of these lies or government propaganda? Unless....


Why not correct the obvious blatant lies and replace with solid sourced fact.


So show us some of these blatant lies....


I know of several,


So why not tell is then?


I can tell you there are many lies on Wikipedia.

BatteryIncluded is notorious for lies. has claimed he is a researcher who lives in a private space station with his cat. His abusive personal attacks and chronic incivility against others (which he mostly regards them as "trolls" and/or "vandals") are taken by the community as acceptable. On one rare occasion his incivility isn't tolerated by many, including William M. Connolley, who blocked him for his incivility against Stevertigo.



Starkiller88 is a single-purpose user obsessed with the failure/repeat of the Russian spacecraft Phobos-Grunt. His months-long disruptions escalated now to acussation of me being part of Anonymous hackers waging war against he. He is obviously a paranoid person with whom it is not worth trying to explain the 5 Pilars of Wikipedia. Now, if I may, I will return to my private space station, stroke my cat and relish on the destruction reaped by my minions at Anonymopus.
- BatteryIncluded, responding to Starkiller88's admitting on RfD that he concocted "Operation Phobos-Gone" in an attempt to get back at him.


It is this lie that makes administrators and arbitrators alike began abusing me with outrageous views (e.g. denying appeals filed to Wikipedia's BASC without any further reason and even not listing Starkiller88 on the list of banned users). Dennis Brown, AGK, and Boing! said Zebedee became abusive, using lies to enact the siteban. BatteryIncluded became a friend and gave me a kitten (but didn't do anything to infect my computer), with insulting suicide threats, resulting in a growing conspiracy to kill me by forcing my suicide via a mediaction increase and "recover". I said that BatteryIncluded is MY arch enemy, as the article on Encyclopedia Dramatica said.
edit on 19-7-2013 by bryansee because: Added info



posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 04:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by bryansee
I can tell you there are many lies on Wikipedia.


yet you are unable to actually show us any .... funny the op was also unable to show any...



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 02:29 AM
link   
That's not all aside from Boing! said Zebedee, AGK and BatteryIncluded. Look at Archtransit, the eighth current or former Wikipedia administrator to be banned from the project. One user claimed "he's continuing to troll by claiming that he has another admin account, he's lied repeatedly in his responses above, and he's making threats (I'll tell my editor friend what a nasty place Wikipedia is if you don't let me come back)". Some of the lies are presented here:



1. The Arbitration Committee has never asked me to respond or even asked me a question. Newyorkbrad is an attorney, I believe. He should know that this is denial of due process.
2. There is a reasonable explanation. Someone said that I was evasive. I was never asked by ArbCom anything. A user asked me but they are not entitled to everything.
3. I am not responsible for the sockpuppets.
4. Wikipedia is harmed by this. Do you expect me to contribute more if abused by Wikipedia?
5. There are valid concerns raised by outsiders about Wikipedia which we Wikipedia insiders never seem to address. For example, several months ago, there was a discussion about possibly writing down what things administrators should never do. They seemed like sensible things. The user was prompted indefinitely blocked and his/her comments removed.
6. There is cabalism in Wikipedia. Maybe it's human nature. Unblocks are so controversial that now you know an administrator should never do it. Look at Ryulong. He's removed comments on ANI and blocked people indefinitely, nothing happened. I read somewhere that an ArbCom request for arbitration was filed against him and he reverted it, indefinitely blocked the user and ArbCom did nothing (they could say that they didn't know about it).
6a. This tendency for cabalism is demonstrated by my later blocks and unblocks. There was a consensus that they were correct. Look at the RFC and nobody could explain why they were wrong. That shows that they just didn't like unblocks and want to kill any administrator that does so.
7. I have no intention of contributing to Wikipedia again if this matter is not resolved. Making the 747 article into FA was serious work. Looking up references. Socks and trolls don't do this. They don't create articles like I have. There is a reason why I did not create these socks but why explain if ArbCom will not listen?
8. A few months ago, I saw a letter to the editor in a major technical publication about Wikipedia. It was unflattering. I have contacts with the editor. If this matter is not resolved, I plan to write a letter to the editor. This is not a threat but merely reporting unfair treatment and other things that happen in Wikipedia.
9. If ArbCom seriously will grant me a fair process and not just desysop without letting me respond, then I will respond. Otherwise, it's so time consuming to write a response. That's the ethical thing to do.
...
Yes. (Lying according to Woody). No ArbCom member contacted me by letter, phone, email, on Wikipedia, in person, or any other way.
...
Are you also going to desysop my other administratorship?
- Archtransit


In the next few days, I'm going to reveal what administrators and arbitrators did to me. I grew weary of their abusive views of me, thus violating Wikipedia's banning policy while following the policy which states that "anyone is free to revert any edits made in defiance of a ban." By banning an editor, the community has determined that the broader problems due to their participation outweigh the benefits of their editing, and their edits may be reverted without any further reason and with no regard to the three-revert rule. In fact, a violation of what I called "other considerations of banned users" in which it is inappropriate to take advantage of banned users in order to mock, bait or abuse them (as in the case of BatteryIncluded, has since taken advantage of my "ban" in order to force my suicide via an increase in my medication intake) with whatever outrageously fabricated and distorted statements. I've never seen such in the past years.
edit on 5-8-2013 by bryansee because: Expand some info



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 04:28 AM
link   
Why not just create your own A to Z of Proven Conspiratorial Activities site, and invite people to fill in the gaps? If you have a good vetting team and the right protocols in place, you can control every bit of information you receive, thereby ensuring to the best of your capabilities that your database isn't being corrupted.



posted on Aug, 6 2013 @ 10:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
Why not just create your own A to Z of Proven Conspiratorial Activities site, and invite people to fill in the gaps? If you have a good vetting team and the right protocols in place, you can control every bit of information you receive, thereby ensuring to the best of your capabilities that your database isn't being corrupted.


I can still remember most of my parts from my database (that is my brain itself). At least it is not corrupted by many, but on the Internet they are, especially on Wikipedia and Encyclopedia Dramatica (particularly the recent events). If I want to create my own A to Z of Proven Conspiratorial Activities site, where do I begin? On Facebook (with a create a page function)? Or anything else. I'll consider.

Elsewhere, I've heard that one Wikipedian, named Scott Martin, added an entry for Russavia on Wikipedia's list of banned users last June after having his indefinite block validated by overwhelming consensus as required in the banning policies for a community ban. However, Dennis Brown reverted it without any stated reason, and nothing happened. This is the evidence of cabalism and admin abuse resulted from BatteryIncluded's influence during the absurd episode about the failed Russian Phobos-Grunt mission on Wikipedia (which is documented in detail on "The Madness" section of an Encyclopedia Dramatica aritcle Starkiller88). Take this as evidence as credible admin abuse, which is made to prevent any chance of misinformation. I believe ArbCom, particularly AGK, is abusive.



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 02:49 AM
link   
I saw this on r/conspiracy. I don't know if its legit or not, but I dunno. Seems like kind of too much of a coincidence to me that all the wikipedia pages were taken down at the same time. What do you guys think, have you seen this flick theyre talking about? Is it real?

www.reddit.com...
edit on 12-8-2013 by rebelstorm because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 15 2013 @ 04:03 AM
link   
reply to post by rebelstorm
 


It looks genuinely legitimate, as it is really not a joke. They do not let me return to Wikipedia by filing an appeal to Wikipedia's Ban-Appeals Subcommittee. BASC carefully considered appeals and denied any "unblock" or "unban" appeals in less than one day without any further reason or comment. I think they are lying to me, and no ArbCom member/clerk has ever since responded/contacted to me by letter, phone, email, on Wikipedia, in person, or any other way. It's all of a setup to get me into a lot of trouble in which I may not file an appeal ever to Wikipedia and the ISP trying to prevent me from accessing Wikipedia. If that latter happened, many Internet users in Malaysia would have been unable to edit or access Wikipedia due to the damage caused by "Starkiller88"'s blocks.

You are talking about misinformation in Wikipedia. These same misinformation is used by the elaborate conspiracy in place by BatteryIncluded to stifle my contributions, suspend my cyberactivity and force my suicide via an increase in my medication intake. The conspiracy spread from Wikipedia, Wikipediocracy, Wikipedia Review (presumably), Encyclopedia Dramatica and probably the entire Internet. The main participants of the conspiracy are the Wikipedia community and the Arbitration Committee. In addition, there are many, including Wikipediocracy and Encyclopedia Dramatica.

For the most part, I've uncovered a great deal of a cabal in Wikipedia created against me last year. I created it myself, by my willingness to create a large group of editors who act against me. This cabal controlling whatever content on Wikipedia are on behalf of BatteryIncluded. The cabal exists not only in Wikipedia, but also everywhere.

When I admitted to him that I made the whole thing up about Anonymous, he started making legitimate suicide threats, which form the roots of the conspiracy. I took it personal. I started vandalizing BatteryIncluded's page, calling him stupid and comparing him to a computer virus (given he's misrepresented comments made by other users in the past), and then trolling him, pleading with the same victim to save my ass. I was banned shortly thereafter; the absence of my name on Wikipedia's list of banned users, the suicidal love message by BatteryIncluded sent to me with a picture of a kitten, the abusive admins/Arbitrators to ever keep the indefinite block and ban (calling it as a "block" rather than a "ban") the credible evidence of a widespread conspiracy to kill me by forcing my suicide via an increase in my medication. So, I believe BatteryIncluded and his co-conspirators are out to get me to finish what they started, by killing me and infect my computer with malware (by locking me out of any computer and damaging/erasing all of its contents and the BIOS as well, in addition to have extremely advanced social engineering). I hope anyone on ATS will not give in to BatteryIncluded's threats like this, by misrepresenting my views and forcing my suicide via my medication increase (I am fully aware of my autism that I can overcome it).
edit on 15-8-2013 by bryansee because: Added info



posted on Aug, 18 2013 @ 02:47 PM
link   
You shouldn't bother with Wikipedia, it's a lost cause.
It is controlled by a handful (read: some hundreds) of what you might call NWO fans/agents/promoters.
I tried editing some articles but it's useless as they get reverted back to their original "PC" state after a few hours.

Mind you, this were innocent semi-obscure topics, I'm not even sure anyone should care.



posted on Aug, 18 2013 @ 03:02 PM
link   
Ironic that Alex Jones' name was dropped when calling wikipedia "government propaganda".

To find the validity of internet information, simply look at the sources; wikipedia has every statement sourced by scientific papers, verified news reports, and experts on the subject presented. Infowars' sources are usually previous blog entries written on Infowars. When they have other sources linked, it is either Natural News, BIN, WND, or another opinion blog.

Anyone that believes wikipedia is government-controlled should provude evidence.



posted on Aug, 18 2013 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by aoxomoxoa
Ironic that Alex Jones' name was dropped when calling wikipedia "government propaganda".

To find the validity of internet information, simply look at the sources; wikipedia has every statement sourced by scientific papers, verified news reports, and experts on the subject presented. Infowars' sources are usually previous blog entries written on Infowars. When they have other sources linked, it is either Natural News, BIN, WND, or another opinion blog.

Anyone that believes wikipedia is government-controlled should provude evidence.


Uhm, let's see.. registered 3 days ago and went on a disinfo-spree with a lot of posts already.
Attacking Alex Jones, Ron Paul and generally behaving like the average debunktroll.

Anyway, on topic: you do realize that Wikipedia (or any other site/publication for that matter) can be biased by simply selecting what sources are valid and which aren't?

As witnessed by me and others, the contributors/admins apparently consider some sources more valid than others.

And Wikipedia considers all MSM as valid source.

Don't get me started on the silliness of the notion of something being legit just because it is published on a book or written by someone part of the estabilishment.



posted on Aug, 18 2013 @ 08:30 PM
link   
You will get nowhere with this, lets face it. I tried to change a footballers page on Wikipedia last year after moving to my club and it got changed back within an hour.

Has anyone thought of instead undertaking a massive task of creating a truthful and more in depth ATS version of Wikipedia?
Said website would obviously not have pages for How I Met Your Mother and things like that. But has a page dedicated to the pyramids and alternative theories to how the were created, JFK assasination, Freemasons ect ect.

I doubt it could be done without the whole sites support



posted on Aug, 18 2013 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThorsBrother
You will get nowhere with this, lets face it. I tried to change a footballers page on Wikipedia last year after moving to my club and it got changed back within an hour.

Has anyone thought of instead undertaking a massive task of creating a truthful and more in depth ATS version of Wikipedia?
Said website would obviously not have pages for How I Met Your Mother and things like that. But has a page dedicated to the pyramids and alternative theories to how the were created, JFK assasination, Freemasons ect ect.

I doubt it could be done without the whole sites support


That's an interesting project and I was thinking about it.
Of course it would be a MASSIVE undertaking.
You and I both know ATS, as polarized as it is, do you think most of the userbase would magically come together holding hands singing kumbaya?
It would degenerate in a huge edit war between the usual BELIEVER vs SKEPTIC vs DISINFO AGENT vs CRAZY DUDE as pretty much evidenced by all the threads on the site.


Besides, there are already many Paranormal/UFO/GHOST/BIGFOOT/WHATHAVEYOU Wikis on the net.
Smaller wikis, such as Memory Alpha (I contributed there on some articles) aren't as nasty as Wikipedia due to the homogenous nature of the members and their relatively tiny number.
You can come to an understanding with them.



posted on Aug, 19 2013 @ 06:18 AM
link   
reply to post by ThorsBrother
 


The same thing happened to me. BatteryIncluded deleted most of my stuff I added and make personal attacks, taunting and insulting with fabricated statements, which were later reiterated in some way by administrator and arbitrators alike on his behalf, thereby abusing their own powers secretly as what the NSA did. His actions illustrates his ownership of articles. I think my sockpuppeting via anonymous IPs registered to Telekom Malaysia is creating a large group of editors who act against me in an abusive manner.

I think there is cabalism in Wikipedia, which is the cause of this reversions of additions into articles. Cabalism is really human nature. BatteryIncluded is part of that cabal, and many administrators and arbitrators are part of it. This cabal is also responsible for crafting a widespread, elaborate conspiracy to stifle my contributions, suspend all of my activities on my computer and force my suicide via a multiplication in my medication intake. I know this conspiracy is really a cover-up for Wikipedia's illegal actions, but this is just for another story.

If you want to know more about cabalism in Wikipedia, look at Ryulong. He deleted comments on AN/I and indefinitely blocked people, and nothing happened among the community. According to Archtransit, who is said to have been created a cabal against himself, a request for arbitration was filed against him, but he reverted it and indefinitely blocked the user who filed it. ArbCom did nothing, saying that they didn't know about it. The most recent one is Dennis Brown. He indefinitely blocked users, with no administrator will ever unblock them. I've read on the list of banned users, an entry for Russavia had been added by Scott Martin, but he reverted it. I know this cabalism what constitutes Wikipedia's abuse within it, which Wikipedia insiders never seem to address, among them are lies and government propoganda.

I am the one should undertake a massive task of creating a truthful and more in depth ATS version of Wikipedia. I am looking for the truth behind what was treated unfairly. Maybe someone will start planning to write a letter to any editor who wrote any publication about it. This is not a threat but reporting unfair treatment that always happen in Wikipedia and the people involved, particularly BatteryIncluded, who made suicide threats against an autistic Malaysian - something close to threatening to kill someone - which I know is a federal crime. I doubt any of my ISPs will try to prevent me from accessing Wikipedia (and probably anything else on the Internet for that matter made by the administrators on behalf of BatteryIncluded), and at times, many of the Internet users in Kuala Lumpur may not be able to edit Wikipedia due to collateral damage from the blocks caused by "Starkiller88", a sock of Bryan Seecrets.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by AurelioMaghe
 


Agreed. Let me explain the truth. I must first deliver an apology to everyone for my part in the deception that BatteryIncluded, Wikipedia and others wished to play out over the past year. My long-term campaign of adding deliberate misinformation to a number of articles, particularly Fobos-Grunt and Anonymous, as well as the alleged Anonymous Operation "Operation Phobos-Gone" made in response to BatteryIncluded's fact that no future Russian Phobos missions were planned especially after the failure of Fobos-Grunt, were intended to create a cabal, a prelude to a conspiracy to stifle my contributions by fabricating my history, ban me from using a computer and the Internet, and kill me by forcing my suicide via an increase in my medication. This is bad, considering the nature of these comments by BatteryIncluded. He, just like the administrators and arbitrators under him, has been eavesdropping on my activities. He has deemed to be a problem-causing user to Wikipedia and the Internet since 2007, and truth-seeking individuals who would irrevocably compromise Wikipedia's integrity and quality. The June 2012 block and ban of Starkiller88 is not logged on the list of banned users, and editors, banning administrators and supporting arbitrators were never meant to mock, bait or abuse such user with suicide threats, fabrications and lies. After researching on my history, seeing that I can overcome my autism whose crippling case caused me to # up what was already a festering pile of horse # to begin with, I find I am unable to return to Wikipedia as ArbCom/BASC denied many appeals without any further reason.

How are they vandals and/or trolls? We were supposed to contribute to Wikipedia when you start abusing us by fabrication and distortion as well as misinformation and deflections? When it comes to matters concerning me since June 2012, the administrators and arbitrators have betrayed the principles on which Wikipedia stands for. All our ideologies, discipline, moral guidance mean nothing to the community, and us around the Internet. I tell all of you what I'm not going to do. I'm not going to stand by while Wikipedia continues to use totally unfair treatment and other things that happen in the wiki to satisfy the community. Especially my arch enemy BatteryIncluded. I know Wikipedia is a lost cause, not just BatteryIncluded, the administrators and arbitrators. You are free to do what you want to do. You are under no obligation to follow me in what I choose to do. Me, I choose the future of our information and the pursuit of knowledge, truth, peace, justice and our survival.

I will see all of you again... if that is what fate has decided for me...



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 10:10 AM
link   
I've read past discussions about the community-banned user Rbj, and found out that according to then-arbitrator FT2, the decisions on Rbj's ban was made up of dubious allegations. These allegations include using anonymous IPs registered from one of the U.S. Internet Service Providers (e.g. Cox Communications) to vandalize another user, named Orangemarlin, who was later indefinitely blocked by Risker in December 2011. KillerChihuahua indefinitely blocked the main account while he wasn't logged in. The block was subsequently met with support, and Rbj's appeal to ArbCom was rejected. Rbj tried harder to fight Orangemarlin because he believed he is

Aside from above, I've heard that Nkras were banned for these same reasons, Nkras is the upholder of absolute truth. I am no advocate of absolute truth, but I am seeking to discover it.



new topics
top topics
 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join