Thursday, January 6, 2011

Schapelle Corby - Wikipedia, Scrubbing History

(Addit to the below, rather than address the gross, well referenced historical omissions from Schapelle's Wikipedia entry, as illustrated here, seems I've incurred a further "Ban," which in practical terms, makes absolutely no difference anyway - because anyone, anywhere, who adds this info will find it deleted within a minute, two at the most. And then my comments/blog post on the Wikipedia "Talk" page, causing this further "Ban," were deleted a few minutes after they were posted. Scroll down to "Personal attacks" at that latter link for evidence of that. Obviously, it was wise to take a screen grab. And here's an addition, re this blog post, to The Evidence File, scroll to point 21, for future authors and screen writers).

(Further Addit - and subject of a coming blog post? An open letter to Jimmy Wales about these issues)

This previous blog post graphically describes the well documented history of manipulation, vis a vis politically sensitive subjects, on Wikipedia, as well as the potentially explosive nature of Schapelle's case - and this post describes how I was "Banned" from editing anything on Wikipedia, after adding mainstream (fully referenced), historical facts to her page, and complaining when they were deleted. So, for the record, here's the "Other" Wikipedia entry on Schapelle - and it will remain as a growing (and continuous), record/adjusted mirror of the official page.

So, when reading the "Other" Wikipedia remember . . .
  • The lime green writing goes some way to correcting the clumsy English.
  • The peach writing either corrects biased phrases, or inserts ignored facts.
  • Underlined peach writing links to the mainstream press reports (or official Government reports), confirming the veracity and historical accuracy of the statement.
  • The yellow writing describes the link, and gives detailed instructions on how to locate the info.
  • Visited links (inserted by me), go a light turquoise.
  • The double row of orange stars indicate how far I've got with the editing, so it's very much a "Work in progress," but also a very important historical record (for future reference), of how certain (unknown), characters on Wikipedia have systematically scrubbed valid, well referenced, historical information.