by Mike Masnick
Wed, Sep 3rd 2008 2:34pm
While I tend to think that Wikipedia is a good thing overall, that's because I know it's not a source that should be relied on by itself for important decisions -- such as whether or not to grant political asylum to an individual. It can be useful as a starting point, if that information can be corroborated elsewhere. Apparently, the Department of Homeland Security felt otherwise in using Wikipedia to deny a request for asylum for a woman. An Appeals Court has now overturned that decision, noting the problems with using Wikipedia as a sole source of info, but the whole scenario should make you wonder. Did DHS really not have the ability to check the legitimacy of the woman's documents without resorting to Wikipedia? What sort of resources are provided to immigration officials that they're making judgments based on a Wikipedia page?
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Tech Companies Continue To Tell Courts To Reject Trump Travel Exec Order
- 162 Tech Companies Tell Appeals Court That Trump's 2nd Travel Ban Is Illegal
- Canadian Appeals Court Says Vice Media Must Turn Over Communications With Source To Law Enforcement
- Tech Companies File Amicus Brief, Still Opposed To New Trump Immigration Order
- Rep. Sensenbrenner Thinks We Can Pay For The Border Wall With More Asset Forfeiture