Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Scam warning appears nowhere in the results. As sleazy of a realm as SEO is, if we want people at risk of the scam to find the warning, then we should probably better optimize our warning so that it has a fighting chance of showing up for the searches they're likely to make.
The Signpost has identified an extensive scam perpetrated by a company that calls itself "Elite Wiki Writers" or "Wiki Moderator", among many other names.Some of the other names they are suspected of using include wikicuratorz.com, wikiscribes.com, wikimastery.com, and wikimediafoundetion.com.
The originator of the content, not the platform that hosts it, should also be ascertained before using the content as a source; unless it is a support or promotional video posted on an official YouTube channel (for instance, YouTube Rewind), or an original series specifically commissioned by YouTube itself, for example, YouTube does not ...
Legitimate reviewers at AfC are all volunteers and will never ask for payment to get a draft into article space, improve a draft, or restore a deleted article. If someone contacts you with such an offer, it is a scam. To report it, send a copy of the email, including headers, to paid-en-wp wikipedia.org.
This is not an effective gambit. The reasons why this statement fails to have the intended impact include: Nobody believes you about your donations. There is nothing cheaper than to say that you were going to donate but won't, or that you have donated before but are now going to stop. It costs you nothing, so it's recognized as an easy boast.
John Seigenthaler, an American journalist, was the subject of a defamatory Wikipedia hoax article in May 2005. The hoax raised questions about the reliability of Wikipedia and other websites with user-generated content. Since the launch of Wikipedia in 2001, it has faced several controversies. Wikipedia's open-editing model, which allows any user to edit its encyclopedic pages, has led to ...
The onus on demonstrating that the material is safe lays with the editor who (re)inserts the link. YouTube links may be deleted if the reviewing editor believes that the video at the link is infringing copyright, or is not a reliable source or is not relevant to the article, just as with any other external link.
YouTube using Wikipedia for fact-checking. At the 2018 South by Southwest conference, YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki made the announcement that YouTube was using Wikipedia to fact check videos which YouTube hosts. [3] [9] [10] [11] No one at YouTube had consulted anyone at Wikipedia about this development, and the news at the time was a surprise. [9]