(full site)
Fark.com

Try out our new mobile site!


Back To Main
   Wikipedia actually broke the news of the Petraeus/Broadwell affair - for one hour back in January

15 Nov 2012 07:31 AM   |   14157 clicks   |   Huffington Post
Showing 1-47 of 47 comments
Refresh
sno man    [TotalFark]  
How much time to you have to have on your hands to be gathering hourly screen caps of (at the time) obscure Wiki pages?

15 Nov 2012 07:00 AM
Amos Quito     
Mrs. Petraeus?

15 Nov 2012 07:35 AM
Seth'n'Spectrum     
FTFA: "Yet, as blogger Milo Wendt reported earlier this week, within an hour of the page's creation, an anonymous Wiki editor wrote, 'Petraeus is reportedly one of her many conquests.'"

Wendt later added, "This type of editorial anarchy is pretty much whatever you make of it."

15 Nov 2012 07:37 AM
davidcameron1     
Epic win for the wiki

15 Nov 2012 07:38 AM
Tat'dGreaser     
These two were probably flirting heavily at parties and people within that community were talking about it. I'd bet people knew about them for awhile now.

15 Nov 2012 07:40 AM
spasemunki     

sno man: How much time to you have to have on your hands to be gathering hourly screen caps of (at the time) obscure Wiki pages?


Redacted revisions are still in the database but aren't publicly visible. Likely an editor with privileges got curious about the deleted content when she popped up in the news again and looked into it.

15 Nov 2012 07:42 AM
Summoner101     
And conspiracy theorists everywhere were emboldened to think their fantasy too could be true and they could soon lord their "I told you so!" over everyone forever and ever.

15 Nov 2012 07:42 AM
finnished     
A firewall prevents me being found? What sorcery is this?

15 Nov 2012 07:44 AM
finnished     

sno man: How much time to you have to have on your hands to be gathering hourly screen caps of (at the time) obscure Wiki pages?


Wikipedia tracks changes and lets you compare the article before and after every change.

15 Nov 2012 07:45 AM
Huntceet     

sno man: How much time to you have to have on your hands to be gathering hourly screen caps of (at the time) obscure Wiki pages?

http://knowyourmeme.com/photos/284529

15 Nov 2012 07:46 AM
zedster    [TotalFark]  

finnished: A firewall prevents me being found? What sorcery is this?


more someone was vpn'ed into Cisco HQ possibly from Afghanistan

15 Nov 2012 08:00 AM
zedster    [TotalFark]  

15 Nov 2012 08:03 AM
Happy Hours     
What's interesting is it only took an hour for someone to notice and "fix". Can you sign up for alerts when a Wikipedia entry changes?

If I were well-known enough to have a wikipedia entry I might want to know if someone started a hoax about my death or just monitor it to see if anything crazy gets said.

15 Nov 2012 08:05 AM
zedster    [TotalFark]  

sno man: How much time to you have to have on your hands to be gathering hourly screen caps of (at the time) obscure Wiki pages?


Look at all the revisions I've saved/can screen shot

Wikis track changes and it's easy to see how the page looked at xyz time

15 Nov 2012 08:06 AM
zedster    [TotalFark]  

Happy Hours: What's interesting is it only took an hour for someone to notice and "fix". Can you sign up for alerts when a Wikipedia entry changes?

If I were well-known enough to have a wikipedia entry I might want to know if someone started a hoax about my death or just monitor it to see if anything crazy gets said.


there are bots that look for suspicious posts, like in this case post from an unsigned user who only posts once, and flag them. Then the editors can fix or lock pages that are being attacked or misused. I'm pretty sure creators of pages can take ownership and be alerted when their page is updated, so there is that extra mod system

15 Nov 2012 08:09 AM
sno man    [TotalFark]  

spasemunki: sno man: How much time to you have to have on your hands to be gathering hourly screen caps of (at the time) obscure Wiki pages?

Redacted revisions are still in the database but aren't publicly visible. Likely an editor with privileges got curious about the deleted content when she popped up in the news again and looked into it.


Well that makes more sense.

themoreyouknow.jpg

15 Nov 2012 08:11 AM
zedster    [TotalFark]  
Now this gets interesting, they actually deleted the revisions so you cannot even see them
s3.amazonaws.comView Full Size


I have not seen that before on wiki

15 Nov 2012 08:11 AM
maggoo     

Happy Hours: What's interesting is it only took an hour for someone to notice and "fix". Can you sign up for alerts when a Wikipedia entry changes?


Yes. Create an account, and subscribe to an article. Whenever that article is edited, the update is shown in your "my watchlist" section.

You can also subscribe an atom/RSS feed of all the recent changes to wikipedia.

15 Nov 2012 08:18 AM
maggoo     

zedster: I'm pretty sure creators of pages can take ownership and be alerted when their page is updated, so there is that extra mod system


That is not true. An article, after it is created, is no different than any pre-existing article to the user who started it. There is no ownership.

15 Nov 2012 08:20 AM
ongbok     

Amos Quito: Mrs. Petraeus?


My guess is Jill Kelly either did it, or put somebody up to doing it.

15 Nov 2012 08:21 AM
maggoo     
Regarding the "vandalism" bit, anyone can mark any entry as vandalism. Yet, contributions which are serious accusations and lack any basis or reference do tend to get weeded out quickly. This was one such case. Although the accusation was later proved to be true, when it was added to wikipedia it lacked any basis. Hence, wikipedia, by hosting unfound accusations, was vulnerable to a libel suit. So, it is costumary to simply eliminate that content, or at least add a {{citation needed}} to that edit.

15 Nov 2012 08:24 AM
maggoo     

Amos Quito: Mrs. Petraeus?


Highly doubtful. If Petraeus was behind that edit, it would most likely be something like "Petraeus tapped that ass".

15 Nov 2012 08:26 AM
pag1107    [TotalFark]  

finnished: A firewall prevents me being found? What sorcery is this?


One that has a sign on it saying "Nose around behind this firewall and you'll go to Guantanamo for an extended vacation" tends to scare away quite a few.

15 Nov 2012 08:27 AM
zedster    [TotalFark]  

maggoo: zedster: I'm pretty sure creators of pages can take ownership and be alerted when their page is updated, so there is that extra mod system

That is not true. An article, after it is created, is no different than any pre-existing article to the user who started it. There is no ownership.


I'll defer to you, I'll correct a basic error if I see one, but I don't get involved with wiki beyond that

15 Nov 2012 08:27 AM
Secret Polish Boyfriend     

maggoo: Amos Quito: Mrs. Petraeus?

Highly doubtful. If Petraeus was behind that edit, it would most likely be something like "Petraeus tapped that ass".


No, the comment suggests it was MRS. Petraeus. In which case it would have included the word "ho-bag".

15 Nov 2012 08:32 AM
ArcadianRefugee     
John McCain is actually one of the lizard people.

There, I said it. If it turns out to be true, you can all cite Fark as having broken this story.

/obligatory "stopped clock" comment

15 Nov 2012 08:32 AM
SilentStrider    [TotalFark]  

zedster: Now this gets interesting, they actually deleted the revisions so you cannot even see them
[s3.amazonaws.com image 779x174]

I have not seen that before on wiki


Its not uncommon. They do that with really sensitive libelous stuff. Its called rev deleting. just peruse the admin noticeboards from time to time and you'll see it.

15 Nov 2012 08:40 AM
Ebbelwoi     
Unless some nude pics of one of these chicks pops up, I'm kind of tiring of the whole thing.

15 Nov 2012 08:41 AM
airsupport     
Would that Broadwell biatch PLEASE buy some farking powder or foundation? She has some majorly oily skin, she looks like she's been dipped in goose fat or freshly bukkake'd, and that gigantic forehead just served to amplify the effect.

15 Nov 2012 08:43 AM
ongbok     

Ebbelwoi: Unless some nude pics of one of these chicks pops up, I'm kind of tiring of the whole thing.


Now that her career is in the toilet, and her marriage is probably over, I'm sure Broadwell is going to be writing a book, and to get publicity for that book I'm sure there is going to be a Playboy spread. At least one of these chicks is going to be appearing in Playboy soon.

15 Nov 2012 08:45 AM
sodomizer     
Wikipedia did nothing.

Some whistleblower came in, wrote down the truth, and it got removed as "not notable."

That's pretty much SOP for Wikipedia.

15 Nov 2012 08:45 AM
SilentStrider    [TotalFark]  

sodomizer: Wikipedia did nothing.

Some whistleblower came in, wrote down the truth, and it got removed as "not notable."

That's pretty much SOP for Wikipedia.


Removing then unfounded claims that could get th em sued for libel? Yeah. How dare they.

15 Nov 2012 08:49 AM
maggoo     

sodomizer: Some whistleblower came in, wrote down the truth, and it got removed as "not notable."

That's pretty much SOP for Wikipedia.


You obviously don't have any clue about the amount of "truth" which is shoved into wikipedia on a daily basis. There is a reason why sources are required for every accusation.

15 Nov 2012 08:50 AM
castrejo     
You know that if a high level person here in Portugal gets caught playing around the people here cheer for that person ??? they do really , Portuguese people are funny at that, that's why we are in the situation we are in at the moment

/wish I could afford to leave

15 Nov 2012 08:58 AM
Voiceofreason01     

sno man: How much time to you have to have on your hands to be gathering hourly screen caps of (at the time) obscure Wiki pages?


Wikipedia logs every edit. Forever. It's in the page history for everyone to see. If you know when an edit happened you can always go back and see what the page looked like before.

15 Nov 2012 09:00 AM
sodomizer     

maggoo: There is a reason why sources are required for every accusation.


For the same reason they have all of their rules:

1. To indulge the pretense they're a real encyclopedia.
2. To make their volunteer editors (who live in basements, are planning to return to graduate school any day now, and either smoke dope or play video games to the point where they can't relate to humanity) feel important and powerful and stuff.

But they're not like abusive cops. Oh no. That comparison is unwarranted and [citation needed].

15 Nov 2012 09:07 AM
RminusQ    [TotalFark]  

sodomizer: Wikipedia did nothing.

Some whistleblower came in, wrote down the truth, and it got removed as "not notable."

That's pretty much SOP for Wikipedia.


No, it got removed as not provable.

15 Nov 2012 09:12 AM
spasemunki     

sodomizer: maggoo: There is a reason why sources are required for every accusation.

For the same reason they have all of their rules:

1. To indulge the pretense they're a real encyclopedia.
2. To make their volunteer editors (who live in basements, are planning to return to graduate school any day now, and either smoke dope or play video games to the point where they can't relate to humanity) feel important and powerful and stuff.

But they're not like abusive cops. Oh no. That comparison is unwarranted and [citation needed].


You're kind of cranky about bare minimum standards of academic integrity.

Let's see...

Volunteers who (reversibly) delete potentially libelous information offered with no source or possibility of verification vs. public servants empowered by the state to protect the rights and property of citizens who abuse that power to harm the weak and politically disempowered...

You're right, that comparison isn't warranted.

15 Nov 2012 09:14 AM
StoPPeRmobile    [TotalFark]  

Ebbelwoi: Unless some nude pics of one of these chicks pops up, I'm kind of tiring of the whole thing.


Let's just stick this in your head then.

users.content.ytmnd.comView Full Size

15 Nov 2012 09:19 AM
NeoBad     
A shame her name was not Broadchest cause it sure would have fit

15 Nov 2012 09:21 AM
GranoblasticMan     
What I'm more shocked about is reading this thread and discovering the vast majority of people who, presumably, visit Wikipedia all the time, have no idea how to use it or how it works...

15 Nov 2012 09:24 AM
dejavoodoo64     

Ebbelwoi: Unless some nude pics of one of these chicks pops up, I'm kind of tiring of the whole thing.


Agreed. Broadwell and the twins to see if they're truly identical or if I can spot the differences.

15 Nov 2012 09:56 AM
Voiceofreason01     

sodomizer:
For the same reason they have all of their rules:

1. To indulge the pretense they're a real encyclopedia.
2. To make their volunteer editors (who live in basements, are planning to return to graduate school any day now, and either smoke dope or play video games to the point where they can't relate to humanity) feel important and powerful and stuff.

But they're not like abusive cops. Oh no. That comparison is unwarranted and [citation needed].


uh oh, sounds like somebody's edit on the My Little Pony article got reverted

/but why can't I cite my blog as a source?

15 Nov 2012 11:38 AM
maggoo     

sodomizer: For the same reason they have all of their rules:

1. To indulge the pretense they're a real encyclopedia.
2. To make their volunteer editors (who live in basements, are planning to return to graduate school any day now, and either smoke dope or play video games to the point where they can't relate to humanity) feel important and powerful and stuff.

But they're not like abusive cops. Oh no. That comparison is unwarranted and [citation needed].


Your post reads like scorn from a butthurt individual. Holding a grudge? It sounds like it. After all, if you are equating random wikipedians with "abusive cops" and wasting your time with childish insults then it says more about you than wikipedia. In fact, it sounds like you are actually one of those guys "who live in basements, are planning to return to graduate school any day now and either smoke dope or play video games", but who saw his contributions removed due to problems and, as a precious snowflake that it is, couldn't deal with the rejection.

15 Nov 2012 01:52 PM
StoPPeRmobile    [TotalFark]  

maggoo: sodomizer: For the same reason they have all of their rules:

1. To indulge the pretense they're a real encyclopedia.
2. To make their volunteer editors (who live in basements, are planning to return to graduate school any day now, and either smoke dope or play video games to the point where they can't relate to humanity) feel important and powerful and stuff.

But they're not like abusive cops. Oh no. That comparison is unwarranted and [citation needed].

Your post reads like scorn from a butthurt individual. Holding a grudge? It sounds like it. After all, if you are equating random wikipedians with "abusive cops" and wasting your time with childish insults then it says more about you than wikipedia. In fact, it sounds like you are actually one of those guys "who live in basements, are planning to return to graduate school any day now and either smoke dope or play video games", but who saw his contributions removed due to problems and, as a precious snowflake that it is, couldn't deal with the rejection.



t1.gstatic.comView Full Size

15 Nov 2012 02:03 PM
The_Eliminator     
FTA:

"Gawker connected the comment to Cisco"

I bet he was just mad he didn't get to see that thong thong thong thong thong, thong thong.

15 Nov 2012 09:44 PM
milowent     

sno man: How much time to you have to have on your hands to be gathering hourly screen caps of (at the time) obscure Wiki pages?


well, when i visit fark, i have no time left to do those screencaps. gotta prioritize how one wastes their time on the internet!

yes, the deleted edits have now been completely removed from wikipedia, despite the fact that the edits have now been widely reported on. so if you look at the talk page for Paula Broadwell - link, you see links to all the news articles, but then they have deleted my comment where I originally found the whole thing. ridiculous.

however, there are other mysterious deleted edits that have not been removed, that are about jill kelley. until last week, she was listed on the Arcadia University wiki page as a notable alumna for being an "ambassador" - clearly a joke being made about her in early 2012.

15 Nov 2012 10:28 PM
Showing 1-47 of 47 comments
Refresh
This thread is closed to new comments.


Back To Main

More Headlines:
Main | Sports | Business | Geek | Entertainment | Politics | Video | FarkUs | Contests | Fark Party | Combined