<table border=0 width= valign=top cellpadding=2 cellspacing=7><tr><td width=80 align=center valign=top></a></td><td valign=top><a href="http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=T&ct=us/0-0&fd=R&url=http://www.israelnewsagency.com/wikipediacensorshiplibelslanderisrael880512.html&cid=0&ei=9P9kRILeBIjyoQKL-aieBA">Wikipedia, Censorship, Israel and Terrorism
<font size=-1><font color=#6f6f6f>Israel News Agency, Israel -</font> <nobr>15 minutes ago</nobr></font>
<font size=-1>By Joel Leyden. Jerusalem---- May 12.....Wikipedia has censored the Israel Government Press Office accredited Israel News Agency. ... </font>
</table>

Ouch. But I do know the feeling. Wikipedia banned me based on 3rd party information in a email that was sent to a user there. Adam Carr posted a email on the Cuba talk page that resulted in me being censored and banned. Since when does wikipedia control email now or even the right to?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=49832973

Yup thanks Joel

This was a very well-written article, and looks very professional, although perhaps a few more links would have helped. It is part 2 in a 5 part series, so we are all eagerly awaiting parts 3, 4 and 5.

I asked Woggly to write here, by the way. Just so that we get both sides. Quite frankly, I don't understand Woggly's side so I'd like to hear it. It's not exactly obvious what has gone on here.

I doubt Woggly will. She seems to think that her responses and action are justified because she is or was a admin there. Although it looked like a temper tantrum from a kid judging from her replies on this.

I would love to see Woggly aka Gili Bar-Hillel respond as to what gives her the authority to call me an "idiot," a "creep," and "dangerous to her children?" But Woggly's clear and uncensored personal attacks of libel and slander are symptomatic of a sick system at Wikipedia. It is Jimbo Wales who takes ultimate responsibility here, not Woggly. Bar-Hillel should have been blocked at the very least, not just for personal attacks, but for legal threats.

They don't ban girly-admin there or have you not noticed that yet?

And second, what is the most effective way for a female to defend herself? Yell pervert, rapist or sexual preditor and WHAMMO !! Isn't death.......

Well I don't really understand her point of view, or what really happened here. I see a Request for Comment that was deleted, but I don't really get it.

I mean, there is no dispute that the articles on Joel Leyden and Israel News Agency, as well as the blanking of IsraelBeach's user page and talk page were wrong. There is also a huge doubt whether it was right to ban IsraelBeach for exposing Woggly's real name, especially if it is true that Woggly is a public figure. That is certainly debatable.

But what is the crux of this? Why did all of this happen? Why did Joel Leyden/IsraelBeach get targetted like this? What was going on?

This is what I can piece together:

Joel Leyden posted on Israel News Agency about the Vote for deletion on the article he wrote, which in turn labelled him as a critic of Wikipedia. Whilst it survived the vote and people generally sided with him, they recognised that he had said bad things about Wikipedia.

For a time, they tried to "convince" him that he was "mistaken" and that Wikipedia is, in fact, perfect. When this failed, some people, in this case Woggly, decided to harass him in relation to things that were increasingly unrelated to the original reason. This is like the fabled wiki stalker Antaeus Feldspar, but in reality many Wikipedians do it. It could be simply a stress reliever. Cyde does it all the time, and knows he can get away with it because nobody will question you bashing critics.

When Joel Leyden tried to expose this in the form of a Request for Comment against Woggly, this led to a lot of people seeing the depths of corruption that were involved in this case. Wikipedia couldn't risk it, so quickly went ahead with fabricating evidence to push for a ban.

When he wrote the new article about it, Wikipedia went further on a deletion spree, to get rid of all hint of it. So that they don't get in trouble.

Ultimately, I doubt that this had much to do with Woggly at all. I doubt that Woggly is really to blame. Whilst it is possible that Slim Virgin did, since I note that SV blanked his user page, its probably more to do with that original article that he wrote criticising Wikipedia.

Wikipedia hates critics.

This is Woggly's page for talking about it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Woggly/Israelbeach

I don't understand why all the page blanking. It's ridiculous. Woggly (Gili Bar-Hillel in Tel Aviv) has a blog in Hebrew with her picture on it, holding her baby. If Gili felt threatened, that would have been taken down by now. And if Gili was publicity-shy, that blog would never have existed in the first place.

SlimVirgin's blanking is just more unnecessary drama, designed to make Wikipedians feel like martyrs to the cause of making sure that "every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge."

Joel, You know Alyssa Lappen by any chance?

No, but after seeing some of the work that she does, I would would enjoy being associated with her.
The INA has a third story in our torpedo tubes. Look for it in the next 24 hours. It does not have my by-line, rather a very experienced, professional academic discusses Wikipedia and if it's fit for the academic community? I see that Danny is being pressured somewhat - at least in public on his discussion page. People want to know "why?" For myself, after being abused on Wikipedia, I have no interest in having a bio there, not until they enforce their own policies of blocking users for personal attacks (i.e. - Gili Bar-Hillel) and implementing a policy of accountability for all edits. Is Slimvirgin a "sockpuppet" of Danny Wool? If not, she / he has a lot of time on his / her hands. ;> I am very impressed with this Website - Wikipedia Review - there is much work to be done here, in Wikitruth and other sites that take Wikipedia to task. The very fact that they describe Hamas as a "militant" organization, is a red flag. The UN says states they are terrorists - period! Why they are reaching for "balance" as if they were a news organization wishing for an interview? I am hopeful that the wise VC's now behind Wikipedia will "heal" the hurtful and irresponsible actions on that Website.

Alyssa is a close friend of mine. We have been talking alot lately about the dirty works of Wikipedia and if you know her you also know her pull in the media area that she has.

I'll be looking forward to your next story. BTW Joel did you get my email?

If anyone is aware of another accredited news media outlet for which Wikipedia is attempting to censor or blank their pages or the publisher thereof, please write me at israelnewsagency@gmail.com

Many thanks,
Joel

And her picture is still there with her baby. The last time she edited her blog was 24.5.06 so this was just days ago. Apparently she doesn't feel so threatened and is lying about it all to gain support.

The Israel News Agency article on Wikipedia has just been deleted again by Danny. The INA has just uploaded another story relating to this and is now contacting major global media. Is Danny Wool an executive of a private corporation or an employee of a non-profit foundation?

I think he is both. You could check the Board of Directors for each place. But I know he is a paid employee.

I found out yesterday that Wikipedia is being investigated big time by a US Federal agency (not the State Department / NSA - they have their own agenda). As I have stated before, you cannot abuse people under the American flag even if you are a "service provider" and get away with it. Look for some sparks within the next two to three weeks. Not good news for Wikipedia's investors.

Oooo, I look forward to hearing about that

You might want to talk to Daniel Brandt, I believe he has a lot of info on how Wikia/Wikimedia are using charity funds for profit

THIS is your weekend treat!
DEDICATED to Jimbo Wales and Danny Wool.

Click on this link:
http://www.israelnewsagency.com/wikipediac...news480527.html

Wait a few seconds for the download.
And enjoy Charlie Chaplin's famous speech:

THE GREAT DICTATOR!

Please forward to each and every user and adm at Wikipedia with the caption:
Jimbo, Danny - you don't own information, you don't own the world.

Free Wikipedia from Censorship NOW!

Best wishes to all,
Joel

Any links to this investigation? Or is it hersay still?

What I particularly liked was the comment about Slim Virgin in relation to Judaism. Slim Virgin claims to be Jewish and hence unbiased for acting in a way that hurts the Jewish community. Its like saying "I'm black, therefore what I am saying is not racist". But yet does Slim Virgin ever say or do anything in actual support of the Jewish position? And what of others like Phaldriel and Flonight? I haven't really checked them out, but it is quite possible that they are in the same position. Or indeed the likes of Freakofnurture and Jayjg. They are either in positions where they are being conned by a manipulative person like Slim Virgin, or else they too are plants, not really who they claim to be.

I thought that this was all very interesting anyway.

I'm sure that Jayjg is genuinely pro-Jewish, and knowledgeable about it. As I've said, problems only seem to arise when he joins with SlimVirgin.

Joel - nice!
Have any of the Wiki adm here reposted the Israel News Agency article?

Thank you for your support. The people of Israel thank you!
No, the INA which was wiped off Wikipedia for a third time being called "nonsense" and is only at Wikipedia deletion review with many people asking why, with many asking to undelete.
Hopefully, one of the Wiki adm who will read this will have the courage to reinsert the INA article, given that THE GOOD REASON by Danny Wool is seeking - is that it reaches millions worldwide, that it has been carried by Google News since 2002, and that it serves an another "noble" purpose in educating the global community on many issues, particularly terrorism.
It is obvious that Danny Wool and Jimbo Wales do not consider terrorism an issue in their daily lives nor in Wikipedia which refers to terrorists as "militants."