I read an article in a trashy free daily commuter paper ("mX"*, probably not available online) which described how [[David Beckham]] had apparently been replaced with the word TWAT. The article cited an interview with a computer security expert of some kind who said Wikipedia's servers might have been "hijacked", and it was surprising that we didn't have any kind of "protection". Supposedly "Wikipedia did not return mX's call."
According to the history, the TWAT change lasted three minutes. Obviously the story is crap, but is there anything we can do to stop these stories? Send a press release to every paper in the world explaining what Wikipedia vandalism is and why it's not a story every time it happens?
Steve * Published in Melbourne, Australia
On 21/04/07, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
I read an article in a trashy free daily commuter paper ("mX"*, probably not available online) which described how [[David Beckham]] had apparently been replaced with the word TWAT. The article cited an interview with a computer security expert of some kind who said Wikipedia's servers might have been "hijacked", and it was surprising that we didn't have any kind of "protection". Supposedly "Wikipedia did not return mX's call."
Wait for the atmospheric idiocy level to die down, I expect.
The last sentence strikes me as a direct lie. Just who did they call and when?
- d.
On 4/21/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 21/04/07, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
I read an article in a trashy free daily commuter paper ("mX"*, probably not available online) which described how [[David Beckham]] had apparently been replaced with the word TWAT. The article cited an interview with a computer security expert of some kind who said Wikipedia's servers might have been "hijacked", and it was surprising that we didn't have any kind of "protection". Supposedly "Wikipedia did not return mX's call."
Wait for the atmospheric idiocy level to die down, I expect.
The last sentence strikes me as a direct lie. Just who did they call and when?
- d.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Actually, it might not be a terrible idea to send them a letter. If it's a reputable publication, they'll correct. They'll also be more careful next time, no one likes publishing corrections. What paper was it, anyway?
On 4/21/07, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
Actually, it might not be a terrible idea to send them a letter. If it's a reputable publication, they'll correct. They'll also be more careful next time, no one likes publishing corrections. What paper was it, anyway?
I said, it's [[mX (newspaper)]], a free daily paper for commuters. I think it's published by the Herald-Sun, the most popular daily paper around here. I don't know if that's "reputable" - IMHO it's a trashy tabloid, compared to the broadsheet The Age, but anyway.
As David said, I would like to know who they called when they "called Wikipedia". Performing the experiment myself, you very quickly end up at http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_room when looking for a phone number, and the only number listed there is +1-727-231-0101 . I guess we could ask Sandra Ordonez if she received a call from mX.
Steve
On 4/21/07, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
I read an article in a trashy free daily commuter paper ("mX"*, probably not available online) which described how [[David Beckham]] had apparently been replaced with the word TWAT. The article cited an interview with a computer security expert of some kind who said Wikipedia's servers might have been "hijacked", and it was surprising that we didn't have any kind of "protection". Supposedly "Wikipedia did not return mX's call."
According to the history, the TWAT change lasted three minutes. Obviously the story is crap, but is there anything we can do to stop these stories? Send a press release to every paper in the world explaining what Wikipedia vandalism is and why it's not a story every time it happens?
Steve
- Published in Melbourne, Australia
I'm still at a loss about how these publications don't notice that if anyone can edit, we can't be hijacked. If they bother to look up the VFAQ for example, they would find out we have plenty of protection in place. I'd send them a letter and make them publish a correction. Maybe that will get them to do their research.
Mgm