I just can’t imagine people, young or old, reading articles in the Wikipedia, making it as their references, whether at work or in school, but merely getting misleading data or inaccurate information.
In an article published by Noam Cohen on August 24, 2009 entitled, Wikipedia to Limit Changes to Articles on People, officials of the Wikimedia Foundation in San Francisco that governs Wikipedia said that within weeks, the English-language Wikipedia will begin imposing a layer of editorial review on articles about living people.
According to them, the new feature, called “flagged revisions,” will require that an experienced volunteer editor for Wikipedia sign off on any change made by the public before it can go live. Until the change is approved — or in Wikispeak, flagged — it will sit invisibly on Wikipedia’s servers, and visitors will be directed to the earlier version.
At last, Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia, realized now.
“We are no longer at the point that it is acceptable to throw things at the wall and see what sticks,” said Michael Snow, a lawyer in Seattle who is the chairman of the Wikimedia board. “There was a time probably when the community was more forgiving of things that were inaccurate or fudged in some fashion — whether simply misunderstood or an author had some ax to grind. There is less tolerance for that sort of problem now.”
One which can be considered a victim of Wikipedia’s erroneous and inaccurate publications and information is Mr. Eliseo F. Soriano, a phenomenal and multi-awarded preacher from the Philippines. Soriano is the Presiding Minister of the Members Church of God International (MCGI), popularly known as the Ang Dating Daan (The Old Path).
Soriano is crying for justice because of wrong and incorrect information, fed on this online encyclopedia by some influential groups who are envious of Mr. Soriano’s phenomenal and extraordinary preaching and mastery of the Bible, giving him unprecedented wits in answering many queries from people in all walks of life.
Sad to say, the misleading publications in the Wikipedia about Soriano were unguarded and undetected by majority of those who were dependent on it in gathering information.
The phenomenal preacher is continuously being persecuted by the group of the Iglesia ni Cristo (INC) ni Manalo and other religious groups who are adversely affected by the fearless expositions of Soriano, by using Wikipedia as one of their medium in spreading false accusations of varied styles and approaches just to destroy Soriano.
While I was becoming curious about his person, he, being so popular, controversial and very much persecuted, I tried to make an investigation and thorough research. I discovered many facts about him which were not presented correctly in the Wikipedia. Almost 70% of the publications in the Wikipedia about Mr. Eliseo Soriano are misleading data and false information. Certainly, there must be some influential group who are persistently manipulating Wikipedia, by incorporating data therein according to their whims and caprice.
Hopefully, in the very near future, this online encyclopedia can be corrected or stopped from disseminating false, inaccurate and misleading information. It should find ways to give more accurate and non-misleading data or record of events and give justice to their victims like Soriano.
Now, it is high time for W to correct its mistakes for unguarded and unprotected publications.
Related links:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/25/technology/internet/25wikipedia.html?hp http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2009/08/25/technology/internet/25wikipedia.html#bozoanchor
August 26th, 2009 at 4:52 am
Wikipedia, even with this new system around, will definitely not solve these problems about mangled information of living personalities.
You are right with your point about Eliseo Soriano as one of the victims here. In my investigation about the editors surrounding or guarding Soriano, these people are connected with the Iglesia ni Cristo, one of the detractors of Soriano because of his expose about their leaders corrupt practices. I also found out that these INCM attack dogs formed a group of Wikipedia editors. For what? To make sure that the truths about their groups are not revealed to the public. And? To make sure, their enemies’ biographies are full of mud. That is where these people are good at – defaming and discrediting Bro. Soriano.
August 26th, 2009 at 7:16 pm
Ulrich
The truth will come out and it live up to eternity. May be you did not here Rosita Trillanes just type to the that name. and you will see truth the about INC ni Manalo is not of GOD. I hope there INC members will see the truth. Mr. Eliseo Soriano loved the INC members to see the truth. He spend time exposing this organization INC ni Manalo.
August 30th, 2009 at 1:39 am
You’re right guys! Thanks for your inputs. I think we have to encourage massive campaign for this on-line encyclopedia to make total revamp and consider change of their systems. They should also stop the spread of false and misleading information.
It is not just a matter of giving information to the public, they have to have a very credible and responsible editors so we can be assured that their publications are truthful enough and not misleading.
I think they have to consider systems revamp and change of editors. They should choose editors who are impartial, knowledgeable, credible, and known for being so. He or she must have a history or record of being truthful, fair and sensible in the field of information and investigative journalism.
August 30th, 2009 at 7:42 am
The original concept for Wikipedia is laudable and noteworthy. People get information real quick and Wikimedia tried its best to put out good materials and commissioned only whom they thought to be worthy editors. Obviously, this was easier said than done.
Somewhere along the way, biased contributors of ‘original’ articles and ‘editors’ with adulterated, ulterior motives somehow got to wiggle their way into submitting and/or even editing some Wikipedia materials to suit their whims and personal convictions. Sometimes, however, Wikipedia contributors’ convictions verge on fantasy or are just the product of hateful revenge on some innocent people who were just trying to do them a favor by leading them to the light.
But I believe Wikimedia can still straighten out their system.
August 30th, 2009 at 9:02 pm
This bias business is been an ongoing argument that every member and editor of Wikipedia no about. Bias people cause the problem, in fact on Wikipedia we have ongoing debates concern authentity of source.
Bro Eli has become part of an unchristian like argument between two religious everangelic cults that make money out of religion. It is a very bias on going argument that is shameful.