Wikipedia has announced
a new, more credible site called
Citizendium where all authors are
The central differences between
Wikipedia and Citizendium are "more cultural than operational,"
For example, unlike Wikipedia,
which allows any anonymous user to edit an entry, Citizendium
will require users to register their names before editing any
Wikipedia seeks to pollute the web?
It gets harder to use web searches
to find valid Oracle information on the web, and opening-up web
publishing to billions of people has contributed to the credibility
First it was blogging, where
thousands of new Oracle-related blogs are created monthly, many of
them being "Hoovers" (a Hoover is a vacuum) that crawl the web and
publish blogs of Oracle keyword spam.
Now, we see a new death threat to
web credibility with Wikipedia, a totally anonymous and un-credible
authority that has been banned as a citation source by all
respectable American universities, and for good reason.
Does Wikipedia support terrorism?
Wikipedia has also been
accused of supporting terrorism, a very serious charge:
"So where the founder and CEO
of Wikipedia has no problem about his editors lying to the
public, he also has no problem with his editors supporting and
inciting acts of terrorism.
No where will you ever find Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and
Hezbollah described as terror organizations by Wikipedia.
Wikipedia will quote the US State Department or the United
Nations Security Council as saying that they are terror groups,
but Wikipedia itself will only describe these organizations as
The Wikipedia Mess
This article titled
Wikipedia seeks to pollute Google, search engines , we see an
former Wikipedia editor speak out about the abuses that make
Wikipedia a threat to finding any credible information on the web,
especially since Wikipedia results come-up high on Google searches:
"Wikipedia, which has lost any
reputation for credibility and is no longer allowed as an
academic source for most universities, is found quite often
coming up in top positions when performing searches on Google."
He also notes that the search
engines might be well-advised to un-index Wikipedia (and blogs,
IMHO), in order to protect the quality and credibility of search
"Wikipedia does not deal in
fact, it works with gossip, rumors, lies, slander and tons of
Wikipedia's Achilles heel is that it is open to any 8-year-old
child or perverted mind to edit matters from nuclear physics to
The author also notes a Wikipedia
"Mafia" that have ulterior motives and agendas:
The very fact that there is not
one professional editor on the Wikipedia's payroll speaks
Wikipedia claims that anyone can edit its site.
But what they do not tell the
public is that your edit will be subject to a bunch of mafia
style administrators who will delete, edit and censor the edits
you make to fit their own political and commercial agenda."
An anonymous search engine is a
The author also notes concern about
a new Wikipedia-sponsored search engine called "Wikia":
"Google does not sell placement
in the search results themselves, or allow people to pay for a
higher ranking there.
But with a Wikipedia search it would be just the opposite.
You would not know when someone was paid to put a message in
front of you, and if your politics meet the commercial agenda of
Wales, Wool and their investors you could then secure a high and
corrupted Wikipedia search placement."
With lots of web creeps hiding behind an veil on anonymity, it's
not surprising that this author believes that Wikipedia is a real
"Wikipedia's slogan is "the
free encyclopedia that anyone can edit." Does that now include
Osama bin-Laden and associates?
Do you want your children hanging out here or referencing
material from unprofessional, biased editors who hide behind