| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Microsoft criticized for trying to pay for Wikipedia edits | |
|
||
| Time: 00:13 EST/05:13 GMT | News Source: *Linked Within Post* | Posted By: Kenneth van Surksum | ||
|
Microsoft Corp. landed in the Wikipedia doghouse today after it offered to pay a blogger to change technical articles on the community-produced Web encyclopedia site. While Wikipedia is known as the encyclopedia that anyone can tweak, founder Jimmy Wales and his cadre of volunteer editors, writers and moderators have blocked public-relations firms, campaign workers and anyone else perceived as having a conflict of interest from posting fluff or slanting entries. So paying for Wikipedia copy is considered a definite no-no. "We were very disappointed to hear that Microsoft was taking that approach," Wales said. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 158 Last | Next |
The time now is
6:32:59 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 1/24/2007 2:30:27 AM |
| Wikipedia prefers to publish lies from IBM employees masquerading as "open source" community members. |
| #2 By 12071 (124.168.196.214) at 1/24/2007 5:39:30 AM |
| #1 Now now... next time you won't get caught changing stuff on there so that Microsoft can pay you! |
| #3 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 1/24/2007 8:04:14 AM |
| This doesn't surprise me at all. MS tries to spin it that they're making *corrections*. If that's the case, then why not just connect to wiki from Redmond and make *corrections* instead of hiring some outside guys to do it? MS is so hamfisted when it tries to be sneaky, just like the Acer notebook debacle. |
| #4 By 2960 (24.254.95.224) at 1/24/2007 8:17:52 AM |
|
I agree with #3.
I have no issues with a manufacturer making changes in a Wiki to correct things. However it should be done by a verified representative of the company and tagged as such, not by trying to hide it through a third party. Sometimes I don't think these big companies THINK about their actions. TL |
| #5 By 13030 (198.22.121.110) at 1/24/2007 9:43:44 AM |
| #4: I tend to think it's a few fanatics within the "big company" that cause nearly all of these types of fiascoes. |
| #6 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 1/24/2007 10:30:47 AM |
|
"Spokeswoman Catherine Brooker said she believed the articles were heavily written by people at IBM Corp., which is a big supporter of the open-source standard. IBM did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Brooker said Microsoft had gotten nowhere in trying to flag the purported mistakes to Wikipedia's volunteer editors, so it sought an independent expert who could determine whether changes were necessary and enter them on Wikipedia. Brooker said Microsoft believed that having an independent source would be key in getting the changes to stick — that is, to not have them just overruled by other Wikipedia writers." |
| #7 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 1/24/2007 1:15:33 PM |
| #6: What did you expect her to say, "yeah, you caught us red-handed"? The spinners are working overtime. Poor MS being attacked by a barrage of lies from evil IBM -- they think. And when they went, hat in hand, to Wiki to help them, their pleas for justice fell on deaf ears. Yeah right. This is just like all the court cases MS has lost where it pays a big fine while admitting no wrongdoing. |
| #8 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 1/24/2007 6:09:05 PM |
|
"Poor MS being attacked by a barrage of lies from evil IBM -- they think."
No, IBM would never do anything like that! That could never, ever happen. Microsoft is the ONLY company in the WORLD that has ulterior motives. Maybe, before condemning them, we should see, you know, what actually was being submitted. Then the submission can be reviewed for accuracy by all. Isn't that the real spirit of Wikipedia, anyhow? |
| #9 By 37 (68.190.114.234) at 1/24/2007 7:08:34 PM |
|
"The spinners are working overtime."
I'd say. So Latch, are you getting time and a half or doubletime? |
| #10 By 37047 (216.191.227.68) at 1/25/2007 12:32:12 PM |
|
I don't have a problem with Microsoft trying to make a correction to a Wiki entry it thinks is in error, if the correction is valid and gets through the validation process. However, the method Microsoft used was an attempt to game the system in its favour by stealth means.
I think that what needs to happen is for Wikipedia to develop a mechanism whereby companies like IBM, Microsoft, Pfizer, or whatever, or even individuals, to be able to challenge assertions made in entries, but to have an independant researcher with domain knowledge in that area of the complaint to read the available information, and either make the suggestion correction, or reject the complaint, but with a stated reason for the complaint being rejected. This would be fair to individuals and corporations alike, and would give the ability to know why a suggestion was rejected, if it was, so that a rebuttal can be presented, in the case where the rejection reason is incorrect on some technical point. And to streamline the process, a company wanting to be able to make corrections to Wikis should have a single contact person who is registered with the Wiki in question as the official spokesperson. |
| #11 By 612636 (117.26.222.103) at 11/27/2011 9:50:11 PM |
|
http://www.buyhandbagscheap.com Cheap handbags
http://www.buyhandbagscheap.com/cheap-wallets-c-7.html Cheap designer wallets http://www.buyhandbagscheap.com/cheap-handbags-c-1.html Cheap handbags from china http://www.buyhandbagscheap.com/cheap-sunglasses-c-3.html Imitation designer sunglasses http://www.buyhandbagscheap.com/cheap-jewelry-c-4.html Imitation jewelry |
| #12 By 653936 (59.58.149.227) at 12/4/2011 8:20:37 PM |
| http://www.northfacejacketshut.net Discount North Face Jackets |
| #13 By 695160 (59.58.155.144) at 2/21/2012 1:55:26 AM |
| http://www.fakeoakleysunglasses2012.com/ |
| #14 By 702864 (59.58.154.182) at 3/9/2012 1:30:58 AM |
| http://www.oakleyfrogskinssale.com Oakley Frogskins Fake |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 158 Last | Next |
The time now is
6:32:59 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
