Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [mythsoc] Lewis mention in Wikipedia

Expand Messages
  • "Beregond, Anders Stenström"
    ... It seems that a reference to the same never-existing article was also put into the main entry about C.S. Lewis. It is not there now -- probably was deleted
    Message 1 of 6 , Dec 31, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      WendellWag@... wrote:

      > Why would it be an attack on fans of C. S. Lewis? How are you attacking
      > Lewis fans by putting a paragraph in a Wikipedia entry that won't be
      > seen by any
      > Lewis fans except perhaps randomly months later?

      It seems that a reference to the same never-existing article was
      also put into the main entry about C.S. Lewis. It is not there now --
      probably was deleted very promptly -- but in the entry on C.S. Lewis
      at www.bookyards.com the article is mentioned, and referenced with a
      link to the Lewis entry in Wikipedia.
      I guess that corresponding misinformation was planted in several
      Wikipedia entries (so that each mention would support the others),
      and that the mention in the New College entry was a last remnant of
      the hoax.

      Happy New Year!

      Beregond
    • David Bratman
      ... There s no longer even any bad sense in it. They cut down trees and let em lie, they burn houses and build no more. - Farmer Tom Cotton, Nov. 2, 3019
      Message 2 of 6 , Dec 31, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Jason Fisher <visualweasel@...> wrote:

        >sometimes people do dumb things, often without good reasons or clear aims.

        "There's no longer even any bad sense in it. They cut down trees and let 'em lie, they burn houses and build no more." - Farmer Tom Cotton, Nov. 2, 3019

        Sometimes vandalism is its own reward, or is the result of factors too obscure to guess.
      • marywilt
        I sent this a few days ago but it apparently was not posted on the list (perhaps I m being moderated for bad behavior? Grin). If it was moderated, can the mods
        Message 3 of 6 , Dec 31, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          I sent this a few days ago but it apparently was not posted on the list
          (perhaps I'm being moderated for bad behavior? Grin).

          If it was moderated, can the mods just delete that previous post to
          avoid double posting? Thanks.

          I'll post it again, for what it's worth. My sole point (if I have one)
          being that perhaps there is a personal motivation for this hoax, not an
          "attack" on New College, per se.

          I'm not a Wikipedia contributor, so am not entirely sure how the
          behind-the-scenes talk goes on, but this entry has been discussed
          before. I can't really tell if the person who posted the response (which
          is noted as coming from "AlcockMarine") is or is not in reality Franck
          Alcock, who is listed as a co-author and is at New College.

          For what it's worth:


          On a "Wiki Talk" page at medlibrary (I'm not a Wiki contributor so am
          not entirely sure how that works!) there is a brief discussion of this
          entry <http://medlibrary.org/medwiki/Talk:Male_prostitution#cite_note-1>
          , in which "AlcockMarine" responds to questions about the citation for
          the Lewis article: I was mistaken in the second reference- the title
          is a book chapter not a journal article. I will reinsert the section
          with the correct reference. AlcockMarine
          <http://medlibrary.org/w/index.php?title=User:AlcockMarine&action=edit&r\
          edlink=1> (talk
          <http://medlibrary.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:AlcockMarine&action=e\
          dit&redlink=1> ) 23:22, 4 October 2008 (UTC) It still reads "Journal
          of AA of R" at the wikipedia site, though. Perhaps the AlcockMarine
          user who said he would reinsert the text with the correct citation is
          the same Frank Alcock who is listed as an author of the article (?book
          chapter?) in question--or is it? Frank Alcock is on staff at New College
          and is (or was) director of a "Marine Policy Institute".
          <http://131.247.154.17/PublicAffairs/Documents/Alcock.htm> Not sure
          what I think anyone wants to do with all this "intuition" and Googling
          on my part, though. Grin. mary


          --- In mythsoc@yahoogroups.com, Jason Fisher <visualweasel@...> wrote:
          >
          > Hi, Wendell,
          >
          > At the risk of making a mountain out of an almost off-topic molehill,
          let me try to clarify my own earlier comments, which I think (and hope)
          will address yours as well. Others, please feel free to ignore this
          entire message, if you aren't interested in the subject.
          >
          > > I think you all completely missed my point when I
          > > said that this hoax was obscure and pointless.
          >
          > I don't think we're missing your point, but you did also ask
          *why* someone would bother. I was making a stab at answering that
          question – e.g., vanity, an axe to grind with those professors, the
          school, or literary theory, etc.



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • scribbler@scribblerworks.us
          ... Excuse me, Wendell, but I would think that the professors would care very much that a bogus scholarly citation was out there on the internet with their
          Message 4 of 6 , Dec 31, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            > Is it aimed at the one of the professors? Why claim that the article was
            > written by six professors then? Why would any professor care that he was
            > listed as one of the authors of a hoax article, and why put the only
            > mention of
            > this article in the Wikipedia article where no one would think about it
            > being a
            > hoax for months?

            Excuse me, Wendell, but I would think that the professors would care very
            much that a bogus scholarly citation was out there on the internet with
            their names attached. Particularly (as seems likely given the somewhat
            insulting topic of "the paper") if the subject matter was quite contrary
            to their own opinions and beliefs.

            Someone somewhere could easily add this bit of joke-crap to a bibliography
            of one of those professors, which would then be picked up and repeated by
            anyone else referring to any of the professors.

            It is an unfortunate truth that there are MANY people who think that the
            more something is repeated on the internet, the truer it is. After 18
            years of being obliged to find *independant* second sources on facts, I've
            seen how easy it is to spread "information" on the net.

            So... again, I think the professors would indeed be concerned with
            something like this, which could easily turn into a professional mess for
            them. Maybe only an irritating one, but a mess none the less.
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.