c********9
发帖数: 87 | 1 Falun Gong was Frustrated in its Attack to Wikipedia
Author: GregoryDrogba
“Everyone can be an editor” is one of the slogans of Wikipedia. But, some
anonymous editor should watch out.
In the article named Pressure and Lobbying – Falun Gong’s Tricks against
Media Criticism, it writes that the emerging Falun Gong used to bribe web
management staff of Wikipedia. Out of our expectations, after the article
was published, the story had an unexpected sequel.
According to the edit record of Wikipedia, from April to May, 2016, the
article concerning Falun Gong had been edited for over 250 times! We can
imagine that most of the modification was trying to use information
favorable to Falun Gong to replace the original objective entries in
Wikipedia.
These editors do not like us to speak negatively about Falun Gong. For
instance, publications of Falun Gong were listed in extremism publications
in Russia, and Falun Gong was banned by the court in Kirgizia. Moreover, it
was prohibited in China, and followers who claim themselves as “true, kind
and tolerant” failed in their lawsuits with reporters.
Staff with Wikipedia had to provide special protection to the article in
case the followers modify the information again.
Mild Action
Members of Falun Gong knew clearly that they could not boast themselves
anymore, so they made up articles about “Falun Gong Theory” and “History
of Falun Gong”. According to maintainerswith Wikipedia, there used to be
official homepage website of Falun Gong on Wikipedia. Some people required
Wikipedia use prominent typographies for Falun Gong website and the content
related to “persecutions to Falun Gong”.
Members of Falun Gong even attacked maintainerswith Wikipedia. They accused
them “violating the rule” and “hired by China Communist Party”, and sent
them e-mails to propagate “the only truth”.
On the pages of Wikipedia managing staff who “made wrong decisions”, they
put long articles to persuade them believe the “truth” and “kindness” of
Falun Gong, and said people who criticize Falun Gong should feel ashamed.
After that, there appeared a long criticizing article on Wikipedia BBS,
requiring delete of negative articles of Falun Gong and punishment to
website managers.
An entry regarding Falun Gong as a heresy made the followers very unhappy.
This entry includes studies of many researchers, including two doctors and
two B. Litts who consider Falun Gong as a heresy in their books. According
to the standard of Wikipedia, publications from Institute of Philosophy of
Russia Institute of Science are authorized resources that can hardly be
modified. But the followers thought of an unpredicted method. They said
these articles had quoted Li Hongzhi and violated American copyright, and
required delete the links. However, as long as the origin was noted in the
article, writers can quote from others. So no one believed the followers.
Obviously, the followers didn’t know that during the 15-year work of
Wikipedia, this kind of argument is not new any more. Experienced website
managers are familiar with these tricks. Some of the information was banned
according to the rules of Wikipedia and two accounts were locked forever
because of “producing virus”.
To show “extensive support”, a follower may register more than one account
. One of them was prohibited to upload information for a whole day, and
another two were also warned. The articles and websites promoting Falun Gong
were deleted. After that, followers became less enthusiastic about doing
tricks on Wikipedia. But as predicted by maintainers with Wikipedia, they
will return some time later. Since 2008, entries related to Falun Gong have
been periodically checked.
Where did they come from?
Wikipedia can be registered anonymously. You can even use it without
registration. Besides, Wikipedia doesn’t require users to show their belief
in the register. But if a group of users care nothing but repost links of
“master’s” (what followers call Li Hongzhi) words, people will notice
that.
There are problems on other versions of Wikipedia. For instance, in English
version, “official” entries were illegally put onto the website. The entry
considered Falun Gong as a “traditional Chinese school”, and the founder
was not the forest police retired in 1992. Of course, before 1992, no matter
in China or in other countries, no one had heard of Falun Gong. But Falun
Gong followers insisted to call it a mysterious Chinese tradition. These
boasting stories were all wiped out in English e-books, paper encyclopedias
and expert appraisals. |
|
