Who's Editing Wikipedia? CIA!

[rgbecker]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6947532.stm

An online tool that claims to reveal the identity of organizations that edit Wikipedia pages has revealed that the CIA was involved in editing entries.
Wikipedia Scanner allegedly shows that workers on the agency's computers made edits to the page of Iran's president.

It also purportedly shows that the Vatican has edited entries about Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams.

The tool, developed by US researchers, trawls a list of 5.3m edits and matches them to the net address of the editor.





Apparently not enough to do.

[EFerrari]

1. Great. Frat boys have taken over CIA. What, they don't have

cable and they're pizza was late? Holy cow.

[MADem]

2. What stupid fucks!!! You'd think they'd send their new interns off to Starbucks with a

non-agency laptop to do that kind of shit!!!!

Man, what dummies....no wonder the sun is setting on our empire. We're as incompetent as SAVAK in the final days of the Shahinshah!!!

[razors edge]

9. That was my first response.

No wonder they couldn't stop 9-11, they can't think two steps ahead.

[rucky]

3. another internet reference source I have to take off my "reliable" list.

[Fierce]

4. Anyone who takes wikipedia seriously

doesn't deserve to be taken seriously.

[MADem]

10. It's nothing more than a convenient starting point, and it's also a great quickie

memory jogger....what was that guy's middle name? Who was she married to? What job did so and so have in the Such and Such administration????

Wikipedia will probably have those answers.

[L. Coyote]

14. Anyone who doesn't edit Wiki does know much.

[Mutineer]

5. And the Republican party.

and the Democratic Party. And pretty much every broadcast network and corporate entity. Everyone wants to spin their image don't you know? That's why I refuse to take Wiki seriously as a "source" for anything.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

6. Figures. But consider.. who joins the CIA anyway?

I once met someone who was applying to the CIA. He was a boisterous asshole, full of himself, and thought he was da bomb because he could differentiate Mexican Spanish from Argentinian Spanish. Wow. Such an accoplishment! Guess what? He was admitted, of course.

These people need to find more constructive things to do with the money we pay them. Removing boils from their ass would exhibit a far higher level of intelligence than the activities they usually engage in.

[MADem]

11. College Republicans.

Guys who think they're like that torturing fuck in that 24 show.

I've never watched that program, but I understand it follows the guy for 24 hours a day, and he never goes into the crapper and pinches off a loaf.

You cannot trust anyone who is completely full of shit!!!

:hurts:

[Sarah Ibarruri]

12. Thank you. Exactly! nt

[Igel]

7. The CIA. And the NYT. BBC.

Israel.

Pretty much anybody that's affected or has a side to take edits Wikipedia. Then again, it's set up for precisely that, isn't it? Not only can pretty much anybody make a change, but there are moderators to referee the changes and revert the entries. They also discuss the changes.

So, yeah, it's scurvy that somebody with a vested interest in an article can edit it. So I simply don't trust articles that are topical, that are about some controversial issue, because it's to be assumed that controverters are engaged in shaping them. But I'm also betting that some of the people with a side to take have boned up on the issues and have something to bring to the table, so even if I don't trust them, they're sometimes useful in pointing towards things to check out.

[liberalmuse]

8. The CIA does a lot of recruiting in Utah...

on the Brigham Young University campus. They've found that Mormons make really good agents (read 'yes men' or 'snitches'). We've already seen the Mormon mafia in action in D.C., and Rove grew up in Utah. Bush also gets his biggest support from the state of Utah. Nice, eh?

[Sarah Ibarruri]

13. Nothing surprises me about that. Mormons are robotic. (My apologies to Grovelbot) nt

[C_U_L8R]

15. Anybody dare to edit the CIA's wiki page ???

oh come on.. double dog dare ya : - ))))

[MADem]

16. Do it from the computer of a College Republican!!! nt

[C_U_L8R]

17. ooooh double dirty trick

[Oilwellian]

19. IIIII'm not gonna do it

You do it. :D

It's nice to know there are watchdogs doing the research to expose these cats. Wikipedia is a nice starting point, but would never take it as gospel.

[C_U_L8R]

20. Let's get Mikey

he'll do anything

[Sarah Ibarruri]

21. Somebody should write, "Waaaaaaah" on the CIA Wiki page LOL! nt

[valerief]

18. CIA Pets and the Fox-Guarding-the-Henhouse Noose. nt

[idgiehkt]

22. I was thinking yesterday about posting a poll about the reliability of wikipedia

I guess I don't have to now.

[alcibiades_mystery]

23. So what?

:shrug:

[EFerrari]

24. Maybe they were looking for bin Laden.

:shrug:

[alcibiades_mystery]

26. I just don't get it

So the CIA edits Wikipedia. So what? It's a freely editable forum. Why shouldn't they edit it?

[EFerrari]

27. It just makes them look a little silly. n/t

[Blue_Tires]

25. i wouldn't trust the cia to edit their own weekly cafeteria menu n/t

[begin_within]

28. Wikipedia is the world's most-trusted source of erroneous misinformation