Swot Analysis Of Any Hair Dresser

bad tips on Wikipedia

Actually universities have something to do with knowledge and have a reputation of knowing more about things than do laypersons. That this is not always the case, must now prove a project of the University Viadrina Frankfurt / Oder, which is "Wiki-Watch known and probably the Wikipedia more or less willing to observe critically.

This project has now published a page with tips of how to handle it because if there is "defamed person" is. Who here the most important, namely, missing a call for self-criticism or an urgent warning about the Streisand Effect finds himself disappointed. It will be called more or less pointless escalation levels, that one could address the issue after their opinion. Garnished with apparent lack of understanding of Wikipedia.

So here again my version of the whole:

• the first place has to come here the self-criticism. Here is some youthful folly came broad, one may get annoyed once - but now makes one third, it appropriate in the media will come to the right width. For many people come to you much better if you stand to his mistakes. If the text in Wikipedia relies on other media, Wikipedia is the completely wrong anyway to address a complaint! If
• take the formulations with the truth not as accurate, you should (preferably garnished with sources) the whole self-correct. In this way, one need not to be seen. Again, it helps to note the above point: better a negative story show up correctly in Wikipedia as an attempt to delete, then at the the wrong version haunts through the net.
• If that does not bear fruit, we proceed to the discussion page, and lays down here, what you want to have changed - to go straight to the talk page, however, is often "do it themselves," commented the same or completely ignored. Again you can remain anonymous. Experience shows that, after coming here, sometimes not always easy, discussions, a portable results.
• Turning to an admin, is a bad idea because they are not there to decide on "correct" or "incorrect" content. Thus this may well be a blockage of one's own account or the article in an inappropriate version . Lead
• If _eindeutiger_ violations of personal rights that were established in this or a similar form by a court against any media, it helps on the to contact support team . This has the explicit task of taking care of such cases.
• is refused her request here, I recommend again to repeat the first step, if necessary even the second and third.

An action is not consciously identified as a solution, since this is not the solution. Such cases lead only to the so-called "Streisand effect", after the story has only just in the blogs and media is kicked wide. As shown by the university project correctly, claims against Wikimedia Germany are legally invalid.
lawsuits against the Wikimedia Foundation in San Francisco, California, USA are likely to be futile if the local laws on freedom of expression and freedom of speech. You just have to see once the election campaign in the United States to know that there are not even slander ostracized by society.