Friday, April 15, 2005

Even the Alexandria library probably had more than one book on a topic! The continuing Wikipedia wars saga

Wikipedia is an interesting concept -- "open information." Its founder was Jimmy Wales, better known in Wiki-land as "Jimbo Wales." There is information. Then again there is disinformation. Wikipedia functioned for awhile, in a sort of manner, as the first. It is obviously presently (and shall we dare hope not for long) controlled by a self-congratulating clique that seems more interested in disinformation than the open information flow they profess.

On Wikipedia, as I wrote before, I have had two primary tormentors: One a self-confessed Rastafarian, well familiar with Alice Bailey New Age works (and undoubtedly with Kazantzakis as well) -- that tormentor professes belief in Haile Selassie as "God." The other professes to be a Christian -- both have worked hard to remove anything from the article that might lead Christians to suspect that things were occurring that might be considered prophetic fulfillment. Since the 'World Christian' had the Bible College background necessary to advise on what facts should be deleted, clearly he is the more culpable of the two as opposed to the Rastafarian who believes Selassie is 'God.'

As I am preparing for a major speech in the Detroit area next Wednesday night, that will have to be prioritized along with my law practice, curtailing both blogging and Wikipedia time for the present; but for the record, here is a significant part of the information the Wikipedia Disinformation Duo of SqueakBox and One Salient Point tried to keep from the world:

"Solana has been placed at [[Number of the Beast (numerology)]] (by me with a bizarre admonishment of unprofessionality by Cumbey for having done so) and [[Antichrist]] already. Maybe one day someone will write an article here at wikipedia on the subject. I have no objection linking him to the 2 above articles through a sentence at the bottom of the article. Of course Cumbey didn't present her belief that he is the Beast here; she tried, in my opinion, to place evidences in the article that would confirm his candidacy of the Beast, and the disturbing evidence of his growing powers to get the Christians paranoid about him and the EU, which is an original concept from what I can see. I have found the Christian material about his beastliness is interesting to read as it has helped me edit Cumbey's thesis out of the article.

"I removed the 10 of the 10 nation Western European Union after reading that that is a critical part of some 10 horn prophecy."

Now notice that he, 'Squeaky' cum 'SqueakBox' did not say I said anything untruthful -- but that I allegedly 'planted evidences', i.e. reported it the way it was. He openly admits he removed EVIDENCES. Is removing evidences a heroic act? Is managing news an act of journalistic bravery or more likely one of journalistic cowardice?

Au contraire, in the legal world, the SqueakBox tactics are perhaps more accurately known as "Suppressing Evidence" and "Obstruction of Justice" especially if it is used to hide evidences of criminal acts from authorities.

I don't know, maybe SqueakBox and his higher-echelon allies at Wikipedia think I inputted the Columbia Encyclopedia (in existence for years!) on the Western European Union. Here's what my late 1990's hard bound volume says of it:


"The Western European Union has existed since 1954 and today includes 10 European countries: Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom. It has a Council and Secretariat formerly located in London and based in Brussels since January 1993, and a Parliamentary Assembly in Paris. The WEU has its origins in the Brussels Treaty of Economic, Social and Cultural Collaboration and Collective Self-Defense of 1948, signed by Belgium, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and United Kingdom."

Wikipedia was conceived of by its founders with aspirations of replicating and exceeding the Alexandria library. It has now become a system open to manipulation with a hierarchy and deification of its founder as "god-king." I suspect Jimbo Wales himself might dislike that title as he reportedly bristled at people calling him a "benevolent dictator." All I know is that every time SqueakBox, "One Salient Oversight" and others take steps to keep the public from knowing facts that they think prophetic implications could be read into, they invoke Jimbo's name, claiming his alleged blessings?

Is it true? For the record, even the Alexandria library probably had more than one book and one perspective on an issue. Why should Jimbo Wales' claimed minions be able to book burn in his name? Is this truly open source? Or is it, more accurately, 'managed news.' You be the judge!

Constance E. Cumbey
Dated: April 15, 2005
Comments:
Dear Constance,

I went back through the archives as a record of all the various edits are open to public scrutiny. I also read through the discussion that took place throughout the history of the entry. In all honesty, it wasn't fair at all. Why couldn't various objections have been debated openly by all parties? Out of the whole "discussion" I never once saw any editor offer evidence that any of your claims were incorrect. What I find most disconcerting about the public record on the Solana entry, is that you are conspicuously omitted from these debates.


Regards,
Terry
 
Constance:

There is an e-mail in your GMail account that you may wish to look at in regards to all of this Wikipedia business.
 
Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]



Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]