Comment Re:More evidence hidden from public view (Score 1) 2
It's amazing what runs scurrying back into the dark when you turn over rocks at "the online encyclopedia any one can edit."
Comment Re:I have talked to the authors of this study (Score 1) 7
Apparently this is just one in a series of blog posts that will tear open the veil over this serious problem.
Comment Re:COI is inevitable (Score 1) 7
Illicit, perhaps, but smart marketing indeed.
Oh, the Humanity!
Comment Nice link (Score 1) 125
I note the link in the edited version on the front page is just the Wikipedia page about Wikipediocracy. Here's the link to the actual post on the site:
http://wikipediocracy.com/2014...
Comment COI is inevitable (Score 1) 7
Most anyone interested enough to navigate the hostile waters of Wikipedia has an interest in a subject, either through employment, advocacy, or just plain liking or disliking the topic of an article.
The ‘Bright Line’ rule is doomed, as paid editing and advocacy is already rampant in Wikipedia. It’s time to manage this, not demonize it.
I’m looking forward to subsequent chapters in this COI saga.
Submission + - Major Wikipedia donors caught editing their own articles 7
An anonymous reader writes: As reported before on Slashdot, one of the most terrible sins on Wikipedia is to edit articles for pay, or otherwise violate the "neutral point of view" policy, per their co-founder Jimmy Wales. And yet, the Wikipedia-criticism website Wikipediocracy has recently performed a study showing that a large percentage of the Wikimedia Foundation's largest cash donors have violated that policy. Repeatedly, and wantonly. In short, they wrote articles about themselves or their companies, then gave the WMF big donations — and were not confronted about violating the NPOV policy. It reeks of outright favoritism. The first installment of an upcoming multi-part series discusses the co-creator of Cards Against Humanity, and his blatant editing of the Wikipedia article about his card game, followed by a $70,000 donation to the WMF. An honest donation, or hush money?
Comment Wikipediocracy (Score 1) 2
The linked article rips Wikipedia a new orifice in a most stylish fashion.
Submission + - Why do people add to Wikipedia? Sometimes it's pure self-indulgence. (wikipediocracy.com) 2
An anonymous reader writes: Uncounted thousands of people have added content to "the encyclopedia anyone can edit". And this has been celebrated as a success of the "open web". However, Wikipedia also has a number of very serious flaws, from paid editors to corporate promotion to self-centered "autobiographies". Not to mention bizarre biases, resulting from political battles and obsessive attention to minor subjects such as highways, storms and videogaming. Or the Wikimedia Foundation's apparent push in favor of more traffic, not content quality. A new Wikipediocracy article summarizes some of the worst abuses. These disputes are rarely discussed outside Wikipedia circles, and are only the tip of the iceberg.
Comment Corruption at Wikimedia Commons affects WMUK (Score 1) 3
It's all a big ball of something foul as the porn problem in Wikimedia Commons, and its expression at Wikipedia in articles and searches, ensnares the chair of Wikimedia UK.
Further details emerge here:
Wikipediocracy discussion that helped blow the whole mess wide open
Submission + - Wikimedia UK's chair banned...from Wikipedia (telegraph.co.uk) 3
Larry Sanger writes: "The Chair of Wikimedia UK, a £1 million charity independent of the Wikimedia Foundation, was banned 11 days ago, for allegedly posting bondage porn of himself and otherwise violating Wikipedia policies. So he was removed as head of WMUK, right? Er, no. On July 26, their Board declared their "united" support of Van Haeften. So the chair of Wikipedia's UK £1 million charity is not permitted to edit Wikipedia. The Chair of the UK's Wikipedia charity is not permitted to edit Wikipedia. So this immediately became a big scandal, right? Er, no. Wikipedia routinely gets a pass for its many foibles. The first mainstream story to appear about it came out just this morning in the Telegraph. More background here."
Comment Toothbrush (Score 1) 3
Without the image filter (something all other major sites have) if you search on Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons for normal, everyday items such as' necklace', 'toothbrush' or, in French, 'homework' (devoir) you get as your top or second hit, porn.
Children are encouraged to use these resources.
Teens are often admin on these sites, cataloging and categorizing the porn.
Yech.
Submission + - What should we do about Wikipedia's porn problem? (larrysanger.org) 3
Larry Sanger writes: "In 2011, the Wikimedia Board committed to installing a "controversial content" filter even weaker than Google's SafeSearch, as proposed by the "2010 Wikimedia Study of Controversial Content." Since then, after growing opposition by some Wikipedians, some board members have made it clear that they do not expect this filter to be finished and installed. Nevertheless, as TFA makes clear, Wikipedia continues to host an enormous amount of extremely gross porn and other material most parents don't want their kids stumbling across. And this content is some of the website's most-accessed. Nevertheless, children remain some of Wikipedia's heaviest users. Jimmy Wales has recently reiterated his support for such a filter, but no work is being done on it, and the Foundation has not yet issued any statement about whether they intend to continue work on it."
Comment Pepperidge Farms Remembers (Score 1) 238
*Rocking back and forth*
Ayyup.
Nothing wrong at all.
*whittles*
They could just finish it and hold on to it too.
*rocks a bit more, snaps his galluses*
Ayyup.
Ayyup.
Nothing wrong at all.
*whittles*
They could just finish it and hold on to it too.
*rocks a bit more, snaps his galluses*
Ayyup.
Submission + - Chinese Dragon Explores .67 Leagues Under the Sea
Hugh Pickens writes: "Earlier this summer when three Chinese scientists descended to a depth of more than 0.6 leagues under the sea in a craft the size of a small truck and planted their nation’s flag on the dark seabed at 3,759 meters, they signaled Beijing's intention to take the lead in exploring remote and inaccessible parts of the ocean floor which are rich in oil, minerals and other resources that the Chinese would like to mine. "They're in it for a penny and a pound," says Dr. Don Walsh, a pioneer of deep-ocean diving. "It's a very deliberate program." The global seabed is littered with what experts say is trillions of dollars' worth of mineral nodules as well as many objects of intelligence value: undersea cables carrying diplomatic communications, lost nuclear arms, sunken submarines and hundreds of warheads left over from missile tests. The small craft that made the trip — named Jiaolong, after a mythical sea dragon — is meant to go as deep as 7,000 meters, or 4.35 miles, edging out the current global leader but China is moving cautiously, its dives going deeper in increments. "They're being very cautious," Walsh adds. "They respect what they don't know and are working hard to learn."""
Comment This has massive implications (Score 1) 1
The social commentary site 'People of Wal-Mart' will have a sudden increase in page hits.
Smileys will become omnipresent on the Web - no, wait...
Muscle shirts, ball caps, and spandex pants will become stylish again.
Google Trends will report 'beef franks' as the hottest topic.
Linux will be ported to CB radios.
