Examples of Companies Inappropriately Editing Their Wikipedia Page?
April 18, 2007 10:56 AM Subscribe
Can you give me examples of companies that have tried to remove controversial information from their Wikipedia profile?
Hi everyone, previously I asked for examples of companies that had tried to use social media/user-generated content with unexpected results. The feedback was great.
I'm here for a followup:
Can you give me examples of companies that have tried to remove controversial (but relevant and factual) information from their Wikipedia profile?
A good example of this is the Wikipedia page for the NIH's National Institute on Drug Abuse. NIDA officials edited their page to remove links critical of their policies. Wikipedians discovered the editing and now NIDA's Wikipedia page mentions that NIDA officials previously attempted to remove criticism.
I can also remember that Congressional offices have gotten into trouble over editing Congress member's pages.
Can you think of other examples?
Hi everyone, previously I asked for examples of companies that had tried to use social media/user-generated content with unexpected results. The feedback was great.
I'm here for a followup:
Can you give me examples of companies that have tried to remove controversial (but relevant and factual) information from their Wikipedia profile?
A good example of this is the Wikipedia page for the NIH's National Institute on Drug Abuse. NIDA officials edited their page to remove links critical of their policies. Wikipedians discovered the editing and now NIDA's Wikipedia page mentions that NIDA officials previously attempted to remove criticism.
I can also remember that Congressional offices have gotten into trouble over editing Congress member's pages.
Can you think of other examples?
A person who claims to work for Bryan Adams (and who seems to be able to change his official web site) has repeatedly tried to remove various tidbits such as bands he used to be in before his career took off (which she seems to believe are now making money off of his likeness), references to unauthorized biographies, and other things.
posted by grouse at 11:43 AM on April 18, 2007
posted by grouse at 11:43 AM on April 18, 2007
Wikipedia Conflict of Interest Noticeboard and archives. Most of the entries there are for addition of information inappropriate to Wikipedia, but if you browse through them you come across instances of inappropriate deletion of information as well.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 2:28 PM on April 18, 2007
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 2:28 PM on April 18, 2007
As Burhanistan pointed out, inappropriateness can be quite subjective, but the university where I work finds its faculty and students constantly reverting each others edits.
Example1
Example2
posted by mysterious1der at 2:38 PM on April 18, 2007
Example1
Example2
posted by mysterious1der at 2:38 PM on April 18, 2007
The Wikipedia page for Burning Man has a LOT of edits, and 'controversial' information is added & removed. The Talk Page for it is also one of the longest ones I've seen in quite a while.
I say 'controversial' because exactly what is 'controversial' can be quite subjective.
posted by drstein at 2:11 PM on April 19, 2007
I say 'controversial' because exactly what is 'controversial' can be quite subjective.
posted by drstein at 2:11 PM on April 19, 2007
« Older Where oh where have my beloved pants gone? | Seeking employee-appreciation gifts that don't... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by iviken at 11:35 AM on April 18, 2007