Wikipedia

Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.
George Orwell ex www.brainyquote.com

The Wikipedia is the free online encyclopaedia that any one can edit. That is their public position. The reality is rather different. It was set with an agenda or, perhaps just developed one. The staff are part of that agenda and censorship is their job. For in depth analysis go to Wikitruth. See for whom the bell curve tolls... or even the one about the daughter of a CIA agent who shot a boyfriend,  had a husband drown, had multiple drunken driving charges and played a part in a poisoning sting operation then who became Wikimedia's Chief Operating Officer?

The Wiki has an article about its Credibility as distinct from reliability. It is evasive regarding political bias - or I have a jaundiced view. Contrast and compare. Read for yourself. Think for yourself. Decide for yourself.

Who Writes Wikipedia (Aaron Swartz's Raw Thought)
By Aaron Swartz a Jew is worth a read. When he was facing prison time for piracy he bottled out.

 

Michael A. Hoffman II ex Wiki
This is one of their grosser displays of bias. Look for words like state, allege, claim. Compare this with an interview gave to Taki Mag about White Slavery Denial then decide for yourself.

 

Examples of censorship and propaganda in Wikipedia

 

Global Warming Sceptics
Tells us about systematic fraud carried out by a Wikipedia insider.

 

Editing The Wikipedia
QUOTE
It is the million or so volunteer editors who actually keep Wikipedia going, and it is this cadre of “editors” and more powerful “administrators” who have coalesced into something of a leftist cult. It need not have turned out this way. The heart of the Wiki theory is that anyone with a computer can be an “editor.” Unless an article is locked for some reason—this is rare—you can click on the “edit this page” tab and change the article any way you want. Most editors register and acquire a pseudonymous Wikipedia name, but you don’t have to register to edit an article. All changes are recorded on a “history” page that lets you compare all the past versions of the article. There is also a “discussion” page where people explain why they made changes and sort out disagreements.

“Administrators” are editors with special powers. They can lock down articles if there have been battles over content, and they can ban editors who misbehave. Although it is easy to change Wikipedia names, an offending editor’s unique internet provider address can be permanently blocked. Sometimes punishment is harsh. Wikipedia’s British spokesman David Gerard once banned an American critic, Judd Bagley, along with thousands of his Utah neighbors who were using the same Internet provider.

Wikipedia has rules for editors. They are supposed to adopt a “neutral point of view” (NPOV), “assume good faith” on the part of other editors, be “civil,” refrain from “personal attacks” on each other, not act as if they own certain articles, avoid “legal threats” or “vandalism,” and, whimsically, “ignore all rules:” “Every policy, guideline or any other rule may be ignored if it hinders improving Wikipedia.”
UNQUOTE
There is a control system just as there is with the Main Stream Media in general. It is different. Sacking a journalist cuts off his living which is drastic. With the Wiki the worst is being banned.

 

The Bias and Dishonesty of Wikipedia
QUOTE
I cannot and will not respond to all of the negative writings about me or accusations against me. My time is limited, and may be more usefully spent doing other things. My initial instinct was to ignore the free online encyclopedia Wikipedia, too, but on further reflection, it seemed necessary to clarify the record.

Tens of millions of people use Wikipedia on a regular basis. They have a right to know just how biased this source can be and sometimes is.........

Wikipedia should be treated in the same manner as the BBC. The BBC is fine as long as one is interested in cars or the colorful sex life of some rare beetle on Madagascar. One just shouldn't rely on it for information concerning ideology, politics, culture, religion or world affairs.
UNQUOTE
Fjordman, a Norseman writes at length about the lies of the Wiki. He got the BBC absolutely right.

 

Wikipedia Bias On Race
QUOTE
However, when it comes to controversial questions—race in particular—the everyone-is-an-editor model breaks down. Wikipedia suffers from the same liberal biases as any mainstream publisher, but exercises them even more ruthlessly. This is because many contributors offer factual but subversive information—which forces many Wikipedia administrators to spend their time actively rooting it out........

It is the million or so volunteer editors who actually keep Wikipedia going, and it is this cadre of “editors” and more powerful “administrators” who have coalesced into something of a leftist cult. It need not have turned out this way. The heart of the Wiki theory is that anyone with a computer can be an “editor.” Unless an article is locked for some reason—this is rare—you can click on the “edit this page” tab and change the article any way you want. Most editors register and acquire a pseudonymous Wikipedia name, but you don’t have to register to edit an article. All changes are recorded on a “history” page that lets you compare all the past versions of the article. There is also a “discussion” page where people explain why they made changes and sort out disagreements.

“Administrators” are editors with special powers. They can lock down articles if there have been battles over content, and they can ban editors who misbehave. Although it is easy to change Wikipedia names, an offending editor’s unique internet provider address can be permanently blocked. Sometimes punishment is harsh. Wikipedia’s British spokesman David Gerard once banned an American critic, Judd Bagley, along with thousands of his Utah neighbors who were using the same Internet provider.

Wikipedia has rules for editors. They are supposed to adopt a “neutral point of view” (NPOV), “assume good faith” on the part of other editors, be “civil,” refrain from “personal attacks” on each other, not act as if they own certain articles, avoid “legal threats” or “vandalism,” and, whimsically, “ignore all rules:” “Every policy, guideline or any other rule may be ignored if it hinders improving Wikipedia.” .
UNQUOTE
The Wiki has an agenda. That is the basic problem. This well written article from AmRen has them bang to rights. You may have been told that AmRen is run by nasty people. You may have believed in Father Christmas. That was not true either. Some of the critics are at http://wikipediareview.com/

AmRen tells us that both the BBC & New York Times are both guilty of fraudulent editing. It mentions Hunter Pitts O'Dell, black communist trouble maker, associated with Martin Luther King; Highlander Folk School ditto - founded by Myles Horton [ [ not a Jew according to the Wiki ], Don West, [ allegedly not a Jew ] and James A. Dombrowski [ allegedly a Methodist ]

 

Judicial-Inc.biz tells us  who is coming from where in Control of internet information - it got a superb endorsement from the Wikipedia until the 9 March 2006. On 13 March it was reversed.

Sadly I have had to revise my view of Judicial. He has an indifference to the facts which mean that he cannot be relied on for any serious thesis but he is a source of ideas. See under:-

Judicial-Inc.biz
Is run by The Skunk who is critical of Jews and Zionists and so well informed that the Wikipedia is worried about him.
QUOTE
He also runs and writes Judicial-Inc.biz which is one of the most influential anti-judaistic sites on the internet, and one of the most reliable. His comments are so shockingly accurate that one wonders if he is a Zionist Jewish insider with a grudge or agenda?!
UNQUOTE on 9 March 2006

That kind of endorsement from his enemies [ see  The Wikipedia  ] is highly convincing. I thought he was  good anyway.
PS, that is what it said on 9 March 2006. On the 13 March 2006 it had been reversed.

QUOTE
He also runs and writes Judicial-Inc.biz which is one of the most influential, yet unreliable, anti- Semitic sites on the internet, and one of the most outrageously dishonest, concerning evidence and facts. He proffers photos and evidence, which have been outed as false or doctored.
UNQUOTE on  13 March
Their perversion of his entry helps prove their dishonesty.

 

Metapedia
If you get the feeling that the Wiki has a political and cultural agenda, you are right and on the road to understanding things. It makes sense to try the Metapedia which also has an agenda but wears its heart on its sleeve.

 

Teachers, Feel my Truthiness - Jimbo Wales Christmas Message
QUOTE
Yes, it's that time of year when children eagerly gather round a kindly old man with a beard. He makes great promises to them, if only they just work hard enough. But they just get a load of obscenities back. Only it's not Santa. Wikipedia's Maximum Leader and peripatetic salesman Jimmy Wales breezed into London yesterday. This time he's pitching Jimbo's Big Bag of Trivia at teachers and lecturers. Wikipedia should be permitted as a source in citations he now says, reversing his earlier position that students who cite Wikipedia as an authoritative source "deserved to get an F grade". Wales' logic is that the students are going to use it anyway, so why not permit them to cite it as a source?

He also claims the site has become more reliable. Under Wales' advice, it's effectively become locked-down, shedding its "democratic" aspirations in all but name. Today, all edits on a topic are sent to a single 14-year old in Kalamazoo, Michigan, whose judgment is final. "There is no substitute for peer critique," he told a conference. What - not even people who know what they're talking about?
UNQUOTE
The Register has its finger on the pulse. They see no reason to believe him.

 

Useful Resource Site For Wiki Inaccuracies
This is better than Judicial but makes the same basic point. One way to judging the Wiki is look up something you know about. Who ever [ one or more ] did the article on pulse code modulation is on the right lines and knows a lot more about it than I do.

 

 
Fix Wikipedia Make the People’s Encyclopaedia a Science-Based Resource
Daniel Loxton, Editor of Junior Skeptic (and the organizer behind What Do I Do Next? 105 Practical Ways to Promote Skepticism and Advance Science) addresses the importance of Wikipedia. Find out how grassroots skeptics can help ensure that Wikipedia is a science-based public resource.

 

A pro-Israel group's plan to rewrite history on Wikipedia (also here).
The perpetrators are an outfit called CAMERA. I would have thought the Wiki was sufficiently on message. They do not.

 

B'Tselem - The Israeli Information Centre for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories
B'Tselem is a human rights operation and their definition of human includes Palestinians. They tell us about Zionist atrocities and use the truth as a weapon. The Wikipedia manages to sound very unenthusiastic about them. This article was written to seem fair and yet cast the maximum of doubt. Words like claim and assert are indicative - Words as Propaganda Tools There is no mention of being a Zionist propaganda operation.

 

The Conservapedia
Has been set up precisely because the people running the Wiki will not take it down the middle. Go to their main page for more and better details or go to Examples of Bias in Wikipedia.

 

Flemming Rose, Zionist, Agent Provocateur and Wikipedia [ see Cartoons  ]
The Wikipedia told us that Rose was a Jew from the Ukraine who collaborates  with Daniel Pipes, a very noisy Zionist front man. A day later the entry  had been censored.

 

Flemming Rose, Zionist, Agent Provocateur and Wikipedia
The Wikipedia told us that Rose was a Jew from the Ukraine who collaborates  with Daniel Pipes, a very noisy Zionist front man. A day later the entry  had been censored. The text also turned up at  www.haloscan.com/ bazar.baraban.com [LesOGRES.Org] Réagir and Europe's journalists speak out on Danish cartoons

 

Jack The Ripper Was A Jew
The Wikipedia which is a propaganda operation gives an in depth article on Jack but treads lightly on the facts that there were a large number of Jews in the area and that four Jews were more or less plausible suspects. For that gem you have to go to a separate article called Jack the Ripper suspects. This is not definitive proof of bias but when these things keep happening it seems more likely.

 

Katsav the Rapist
Is the President of Israel and about to be charged with rape and fraud. The Wiki tells us but wants us to believe that he has been fitted up. See President of Israel to be charged with rape and fraud for more and better details.
PS The version dated "This page was last modified 09:33, 25 January 2007" tells us that Katsav got mouthy with journalists. The version down loaded a few hours later is dated "This page was last modified 14:10, 23 January 2007" leaves out the bit about him abusing the reporters but includes the claim that he was charged on 23 January. The Wikipedia's editors are in a position to cheat. They do.
PS Katsav got six years. He was put in the same cell as the Minister of Health.

 

Metapedia Versus Wikipedia
Two operations mean two versions of the truth. I like the Metapedia. Others definitely do not.

 

Wiki's biased editing exposed by computer program
Surprising? Not to me at all events. A bright lad has used IP addresses to trace who is changing entries and it is corporate public relations departments all too often. It is not just commercial operations massaging the truth. Government outfits are at it too.
QUOTE
The credibility of the online encyclopaedia Wikipedia has taken another dive after a newly developed software program exposed how the CIA, corporations like Diebold and others routinely edit entries to bury criticism and manipulate the truth.

The Wikipedia Scanner (http://wikiscanner.virgil.gr/) also allows users to type in an IP range and find out which organizations are editing what pages on Wikipedia.

"The result: A database of 5.3 million edits, performed by 2.6 million organizations or individuals ranging from the CIA to Microsoft to Congressional offices, now linked to the edits they or someone at their organization's net address has made. Some of this appears to be transparently self-interested, either adding positive, press release-like material to entries, or deleting whole swaths [ sic ] of critical material," concludes the Wired report.
UNQUOTE
This is straightforward abuse by powerful interests. There is no mention of the owner's agenda.

 

Wikipedia Hivemind
Was kicking up all sorts of dust about the place... painted.. as burnt-out editors, Wikipedia Head cases if you will, as much a part of the Wikipedia as anything else. That is.. mere insider posturing.

 

The Wikipedia and Propaganda
The gloves come off when the issue matters. This is Zionist propaganda about the Bolshevik Revolution.

 

Wikipedia On Race - Blacks Get A Pass
QUOTE
With almost 2.4 million on-line entries, and more than 1 million volunteer editors, the English-language version of Wikipedia.com is the world’s biggest encyclopaedia, and according to the rating service Alexa it is the world’s ninth-most frequently visited Internet site. “The free encyclopaedia that anyone can edit” promises to deliver “the sum of all human knowledge.”...........

However, when it comes to controversial questions—race in particular—the everyone-is-an-editor model breaks down. Wikipedia suffers from the same liberal biases [ Englishmen should read that as left wing  biases - Editor ] as any mainstream publisher, but exercises them even more ruthlessly. This is because many contributors offer factual but subversive information—which forces many Wikipedia administrators to spend their time actively rooting it out...........

Wikipedia’s treatment of pro-white or race-realist groups is transparent propaganda. The article on white nationalism reminds readers that the very concept of race is “an anthropological archaism,” and suggests only two possible positions on race: multiculturalism or neo-Nazism. It writes admiringly of anti-white groups as “anti-racist organizations,” while treating anyone sympathetic to whites with hostility and scepticism. Any concern for the survival of whites is nothing more than “the repackaging, relabelling, and transformation of white supremacy into something that would appeal to a broader, more educated audience.” Conclusion: “The American Renaissance, Council of Conservative Citizens, the National Alliance and National Vanguard are ... widely recognized as white supremacist and racist groups.”......

It would be easy to cite more examples, but the point is clear: Wikipedia actively purveys and reinforces the prejudices of our time. I see it as a cross between an Internet message board and today’s authoritarian, multi-cultural university. Or, as co-founder Larry Sanger, himself a liberal, wrote in June 2006, “Wikipedia has gone from a nearly perfect anarchy to an anarchy with gang rule.”
UNQUOTE
A rather long article with solid positions on facts and the Wiki's attitude. It is another propaganda machine.

 

The Wikipedia and Teddy Kennedy
QUOTE
Ted Kennedy Chappaquiddick incident
The Chappaquiddick incident
refers to the circumstances surrounding the 1969 death of Mary Jo Kopechne, a campaign worker for Senator Kennedy. Kopechne was killed when the Senator drove his mother's vehicle off of a bridge and into a channel after a party at Chappaquiddick Island, Martha's Vineyard.
UNQUOTE
The Wikipedia article on Kennedy treads very lightly on the Chappaquiddick Massacre and makes no mention at all of the Florida Rape. The specific article on Chappaquiddick makes no mention of his lack of a driving licence far less his intentions towards his victim.

 

Why is Wikipedia Censoring Me?
James Bacque is an author of historical books dealing with the Second World War and is not pleased by the Wikipedia's very one sided comments on one of his books. He published corrections. They wiped his work out and made the comments even more dishonest. Their objection was that he was telling truth rather than  the Jewish version.

 

Wikipedia Watch
Someone else casts a jaundiced eye over the Wikipedia. It is fair to say that the owner thereof, Jimmy Wales, the pornographer has the good sense to keep the best for himself.

 

Wikipedia founder sidelines amateur editors
It was founded by two Jews. There was a parting of ways and now a rival operation.

 

White Nationalist Wikipedia on Wikipedia
The Wikipedia has its bias and its agenda - concealed but there none the less. The WN Wiki puts fact and opinion into the public domain. Read for yourself. Think for yourself. Decide for yourself.
PS It is no longer with us. RIP or arise triumphant.

 

Wikipedia Review
Some one else has a view about their honesty.

 

Wikipedia and Vandalism
They are open to a lot of people who want to write things so they have to have a degree of oversight. They claim that articles should be written down the middle without a point of  view obtruding. It does not work like that of course.

 

Wikipedia and the intelligence services
QUOTE
..... As I could not locate the article in which I had learned about the allegations, I consulted the article on the Entebbe Operation on Wikipedia, where I knew the story had been noted. To my surprise, I found that all references to the alleged collaboration between the PFLP and the Shin Bet had been suppressed. Moreover, it is no longer possible to edit the page.....

In the aftermath of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the Pentagon set up the Defence Department's Office of Strategic Influence with a mission "to provide news items and false information directly to foreign journalists and others to bolster U.S. policy and the war on terrorism."
UNQUOTE
The Wiki is very useful to people so it gets used by propaganda outfits.

 

Wikipedia - What it Doesn't Say 
Somebody else found out the hard way that Wikipedia tells us what it wants, not what we want.

 

Wikipedia Advertisement
QUOTE
He's a one-time futures trader and the force behind one of the internet's most successful sites - and unlike many of his peers he hasn't sold out to big business for billions. It's all done in the name of free knowledge for all, he says.

Non-profit Wikipedia - the online encyclopaedia that anyone can access and edit - is the work of Jimmy Wales, a man who states on his personal website that his goal is "free knowledge for free minds".
UNQUOTE
This article minimizes Wales' pornography and says nothing at all about his agenda.

 

Wikitruth
QUOTE
 

The truth needs to be revealed. The atrocities have gone on long enough.

Welcome toWikitruth,

the free scandal sheet that anyone can visit.

UNQUOTE
Sex, lust, violence, corruption, the inside story; what more could you want?

 


Wikipedia to tighten editorial process  [ 20 December 2005 ]
It always was tight but secret. The public sales pitch and the public perception was that it open to anyone to write and to be criticized. The reality is not the same. Editing has a political agenda just like the rest of the media.

 

The truths and lies of WikiWorld [ 12 October 2007 ]
QUOTE
The free online encyclopaedia Wikipedia is a democratically decided database that has been open to abuse, but the advent of WikiScanner has uncovered a web of deceit and disinformation...........
UNQUOTE
Anyone can edit. Anyone does; especially anyone with a special interest. First class article but it does not pick up on the fact that the de facto owner of the Wiki has his very own agenda and the power to get away with it.

 

Wikipedia Perverts Truth About Obama [ 13 March 2009 ]
QUOTE
Wikipedia, the online "free encyclopaedia" mega-site written and edited entirely by its users, has been deleting within minutes any mention of eligibility issues surrounding Barack Obama's presidency, with administrators kicking off anyone who writes about the subject, WND has learned. A perusal through Obama's current Wikipedia entry finds a heavily guarded, mostly glowing biography about the U.S. president. Some of Obama's most controversial past affiliations, including with Rev. Jeremiah Wright and former Weathermen terrorist Bill Ayers, are not once mentioned, even though those associations received much news media attention and served as dominant themes during the presidential elections last year.

Also completely lacking is any mention of the well-publicized concerns surrounding Obama's eligibility to serve as commander-in-chief.

Where's the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 300,000 others and sign up now! 
UNQUOTE
The Wikipedia is a lie machine and part of the main stream media. It is controlled by someone with an agenda.

 

Wikipedia Man Murdered His Mother [ 28 April 2009 ]
QUOTE
Wikipedia's Norwegian press officer - one of the "bureaucrats" who oversaw Norway's incarnation of the "free encyclopaedia anyone can edit" - has been arrested for killing his mother. Last week, as reported by Dagbladet, one of Norway's largest newspapers, a 36-year-old man phoned the police in the small town of Son in Vestby and told them he had killed his mother, who was in her fifties. The man - whose named was withheld by the paper, according to local law - was a school teacher and one of eight bureaucrats charged with running Wikipedia Norge. According to his Wikipedia bio - which was since been purged from the site - he was the project's press spokesperson and once worked on the English arm of the free encyclopaedia/alternate universe.
UNQUOTE
This does not prove that the Wikipedia is deeply evil.

 

Wikipedia Tells The Lie Direct About Jews Running Bolshevism [ 1 November 2011 is All Saints Day ]
QUOTE
Jewish Bolshevism, Judeo-Bolshevism, and known as Żydokomuna in Poland, is an antisemitic stereotype based on the claim that Jews have been the driving force behind or are disproportionately involved in the modern Communist movement, or sometimes more specifically Russian Bolshevism........... The allegation still sees use in antisemitic publications and websites today.
UNQUOTE
The Wikipedia is reasonably reliable until the agenda cuts in. Knowing where it is untrustworthy makes it more useful. Merely suppressing the truth is easier to get away with. Gross lies like this one are unusual for that reason.

One honest source is Robert Wilton, an Englishman who was in Russia during the  October Revolution. He wrote The Last Days of the Romanovs and named the Jews running Russia. The Wikipedia pretends he does not exist. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was a famous Russian dissident until he wrote 200 Years Together which named the perpetrators, the Jews who murdered, robbed, raped, tortured. Then he became a non-person. See Chapter 21 in particular. More evidence is at Jews After The Revolution and at Communism Was Jewish. This article lies about Frank L Britton who wrote Behind Communism explaining the menace that is the Jew giving sources, giving evidence. That is why the Wiki does not link to his book. Read for yourself. Think for yourself. Decide for yourself.

 

Wiki Claims That Jews Are Victims Not Perpetrators [ 1 November 2011 is All Saints Day ]
QUOTE
Jews had been a persecuted minority in the Russian Empire. They had endured a form of racial segregation in the Pale of Settlement, as well as sporadic pogroms. In the period from 1881 to 1920, more than two million Jews left Russia.
UNQUOTE
One of that two million was Jack The Ripper, Another Jew

 

Errors & omissions, broken links, cock ups, over-emphasis, malice [ real or imaginary ] or whatever; if you find any I am open to comment.

Email me at Mike Emery. All financial contributions are cheerfully accepted. If you want to keep it private, use my PGP KeyHome Page

Updated  on  Saturday, 24 December 2016 08:58:37