Police Chief Demands His Staff Monitor His Wikipedia Entry
from the abuse-of-power? dept
Just as Slashdot is reporting about the mayor of Florence suing Wikipedia comes the news that a police chief in West Yorkshire, in the UK, is so upset with the edits to his own Wikipedia entry that he's required his staff to monitor the page and make changes or revisions to it in response to critical comments left on the page. Now, obviously, having critical information about you on Wikipedia may not be pleasant, but aren't there more important things for folks in a police department to be working on?






Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
no.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: no.
As long as the staff is maintaining the truth - you forgot to add - he wants everyone to see then there is nothing wrong with this.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Umm...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Ridiculous
Woe be to the naysayers, the West Yorkies are watching you.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Why the hate?
Get over it. This is a part of this new life we face.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
streisand effect in 3...2...1...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Perhaps the root of this issue needs to be sorted out?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
WikiPedia full of bad info
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Now, having said that to think that police would be taken off the street to secure some edits on a Wiki is ridiculous. I would make a more reasonable assumption that they would monitor this post on their downtime.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
that's funny
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Missing the point folks?
It's a conflict of interest. It goes against policy in Wikipedia to have someone self-edit or a party of that person to edit for them as it decreases the neutrality of the article.
He's focussing on presenting a padded biography instead of a factual one. While this may be acceptable on a personal website, it is not acceptable on wikipedia. It is alright to remove libel, slander and opinion from the article, however to replace that with opinion is just as bad as the vandalism that initially took place.
On top of that, the fact that he's directed staff to maintain his version of the story, and not necessarily a true representation (as saved by the Wikipedia editors) is a gross misuse of resources on his part as well as a violation of wikipedias rules against conflict of interest.
He's nothing but in the wrong in this case.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
That's funny. Talk about Kettle calling Pot black, here we have someone posting as "StarFleet Command" criticizing someone else for posting anonymously!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Umm...
I see no problem with this.
But then, you have no problem with being a notorious liar either.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Public funds used for personal business?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Or too egotistical?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Umm...
Awful strong words coming from a notorious coward.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Ha ha funny
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Umm...
Ha, ha, ha! And just exactly who are you? Pot, meet kettle.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: no.
What he should have done is ignored it.
Now the whole world knows.
Since his staff playing whack-a-mole around the internet doing damage control is neither in their job description nor does it scale, it would have been better never to go down this road.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment