Comments on: When Wikipedia Gets It Wrong

By: ★ ★ SearcH EngineS WeB ★ ★

★ ★ SearcH EngineS WeB ★ ★ — Thu, 25 Jan 2007 11:53:45 +0000

What Microsoft Did was perfectly justified – the problem is with WikiPedia’s restrictions – no one has a right to tell a business not to participate in posting about a matter of interest on an extremely popular Website,

of course, facts can be misrepresented by Both Parties – but editors will revise what they feel are lies or exaggerations. Also, detractors may NOT know all the facts involved

But freedom of complete participation is essential

The problem is that WikiPedia Would NOT change its entire policy just to please Microsoft.

And any endeavor of Microsoft contacting them to stress the urgency need to particpate to balance the issue…..means rumours would have been generated out of thin air and blown out of proportion that Microsoft tried to inimidate or put pressure on Wikipedia.

The problem is that also no matter MS did or did not choose to do – they would have been critcized…..

http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=275362

By: Lisa

Lisa — Wed, 24 Jan 2007 22:06:39 +0000

Veridicus – I totally agree with you that it was irresponsible for Dough to act on Microsoft’s behalf without consulting anyone. He was wrong not to. But Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia. It’s supposed to be about stating facts, not expressing viewpoints. Isn’t it just as irresponsible for them to leave up false information? Where does their power of authority end?

By: Eric Enge

Eric Enge — Wed, 24 Jan 2007 21:55:25 +0000

It just exposes the whole issue that Stephen Colbert got upset about - you can't define reality simply by trusting people to share their expertise. People will want to abuse it, or will put incorrect information up there.

I just can't figure out how this remains credible for the long term. My advice on Wikipedia to people is that you can use it as a source if the information is not critical to you.

Even then, you need to check it somewhere else to verify it, if you are oging to make use of the information.

By: veridicus

veridicus — Wed, 24 Jan 2007 21:29:54 +0000

The Microsoft employee, Dough, was wrong all the way around. If he had an issue with the wikipedia entry he should have told marketing and stopped there. Speaking to anyone outside the company about it makes him a representative of the company as a whole. Therefore the company was working around Wikipedia’s rules to have content changed. Microsoft has their own sites for expressing their own views. They need to stay off their Wikipedia pages directly and indirectly.

By: Evan Reiser

Evan Reiser — Wed, 24 Jan 2007 20:41:19 +0000

I totally agree with you here, check out this article on the ongoing Microsoft/Wikipedia Neutral Point of View Debate

http://microsoftisawesome.blogspot.com/2007/01/microsoft-pays-editors-to-improve.html