“Philip Cross” Affair Reveals Jewish Lobby’s Editing of Wikipedia

[Down1]

The news that an anonymous user by the name of “Philip Cross” has made over 30 edits per day, seven days a week, for 14 years without a single break, all to push pro-Israel propaganda, is firm evidence of the Jewish lobby’s ongoing editing of the “open” Wikipedia website, it has emerged.
http://newobserveronline.com/philip-cross-affair-reveals-jewish-lobbys-editing-of-wikipedia/

[Ares]

http://newobserveronline.com/philip-cross-affair-reveals-jewish-lobbys-editing-of-wikipedia/

https://s16-us2.startpage.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi2.wp.com%2Fwww.occid entaldissent.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F09%2FThe-Goyim-Know.jpg%3Fresize%3D600%252C381&sp=a33eca8d626ea4702dcf8cb2df09654b

[PatColo]

I can think of at least a couple diff times, I went to Kikepedia for something, & there was this huge banner at top soliciting donations, with all the virtuous sounding bs re who/what they represent for the world. I recall one of those banners was the "window shade" type which obnoxiously covered the whole screen & needed to be X-ed out. :(


https://i.ytimg.com/vi/wIYhE-hei2Y/hqdefault.jpg?sqp=-oaymwEXCNACELwBSFryq4qpAwkIARUAAIhCGAE=&rs=AOn4CLDi6LGbyASvAlDpAc0rfXh5rK-9iA 2:21
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIYhE-hei2Y) Wikipedia Editing Courses Launched by Zionist Propaganda Machine (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIYhE-hei2Y)

[cheka.]

for more proof look up their disgusting 'definition' of hate group

[PatColo]

Wikipedia (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia)



Wikipedia


http://en.metapedia.org/m/images/thumb/1/12/Wikipedia.png/180px-Wikipedia.png (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/File:Wikipedia.png)


Motto
The free encyclopedia that anyone can edit


Existence
January 15, 2001—present


Type
Wiki (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wiki)


Headquarters
Tampa, Florida (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Florida), USA (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/United_States)


Owner
Wikimedia Foundation


Founder
Jimmy Wales (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Wales), Larry Sanger (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Larry_Sanger)


Website
Wikipedia.org

(http://www.wikipedia.org/)



http://en.metapedia.org/m/images/thumb/4/42/Wikipedia_explains_different_forms_of_pride.jpg/450px-Wikipedia_explains_different_forms_of_pride.jpg (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/File:Wikipedia_explains_different_forms_of_pride.j pg) http://en.metapedia.org/m/skins/common/images/magnify-clip.png (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/File:Wikipedia_explains_different_forms_of_pride.j pg)
Black pride, Gay pride, Asian pride, and White pride, as explained by Wikipedia.

See also Wikipedia's and RationalWiki's race articles (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%27s_and_RationalWiki%27s_race_articles).


Wikipedia is a multilingual wiki (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wiki) project. As the world's largest encyclopedia it has enormous and often pernicious influence.
In 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation openly stated that it is a political organization and participated in opposition against US President Donald Trump (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump)’s immigration (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Immigration) policy.[1]

(http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#cite_note-trump-0)


Contents

[hide]


1 General criticisms (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#General_criticisms)
2 Evaluations (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#Evaluations)
3 The Wikimedia Foundation, money, and politics (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#The_Wikimedia_Foundation.2C_money.2C_and _politics)
4 Leftist, politically correct, and anti-White bias (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#Leftist.2C_politically_correct.2C_and_an ti-White_bias)
5 Radicalization (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#Radicalization)
6 Organized team editing (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#Organized_team_editing)
7 Specific biased topics and articles (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#Specific_biased_topics_and_articles)

7.1 Race articles (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#Race_articles)
7.2 Holocaust articles (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#Holocaust_articles)
7.3 Alt-Right article (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#Alt-Right_article)
7.4 Word usage (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#Word_usage)
7.5 Missing articles (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#Missing_articles)
7.6 Deleted articles (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#Deleted_articles)


8 Metapedia article (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#Metapedia_article)
9 See also (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#See_also)
10 External links (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#External_links)

10.1 Sites about Wikipedia (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#Sites_about_Wikipedia)
10.2 Criticisms (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#Criticisms)
10.3 Article archives (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#Article_archives)
10.4 Jewish influence (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#Jewish_influence)


11 References (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#References)





General criticisms

Wikipedia has been criticized for many reasons. Some examples:



Content in practice often decided by the majority of the particular editors being involved in a particular dispute at a particular moment. There are some rules (such as the "three-revert rule" granting each individual three reverts within a 24-hour period) which in effect enforce this, by ensuring that the majority side will win any "edit wars" over article contents. The rules also state that views from both sides should be included (the so-called "Neutral point of view" rule). But the majority of involved editors decides also how the minority view of involved editors should be represented in the article, so this rule seems to amount to little more than an instruction to include some token straw men (http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Straw_men) arguments from the other side. As such, Wikipedia can be considered an ongoing opinion survey of the personal opinions of the unrepresentative and generally leftist group editing the website.





In addition to the above method, Wikipedia has a complex, multi-layered bureaucracy and a vast, complicated, and obscure set of rules regarding contents. The labyrinthine systems of rules, norms, dispute resolutions systems, and enforcement systems have been criticized as difficult to master, giving experienced editors a large advantage in content disputes.



more: http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia