08-02-2015, 05:37 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-02-2015, 06:05 AM by Albert Doyle.)
Good article Peter. My own experience with Wikipedia is that I noticed the Jimi Hendrix page was full of proven falsehoods about his death that mirrored the long-refuted official story. I went to the 'Talk' page (which is a hidden article discussion page) to protest. I suggested the real facts and gave references, also complaining that whoever was editing the original article was preferring an official story bias against the facts. The editor who was dominating the article said to give him a break because it was under construction and give him time. Eventually a new, separate, Death Of Jimi Hendrix Wikipedia article was made.
Just like you describe there were certain conservative editors that kept entering the Talk page to complain that the murder theories were just that and violated Wikipedia content policy. They especially focused on Tappy Wright's unproven claim that he heard Michael Jeffery confess to murdering Jimi. The dark members kept removing the Tappy Wright entry using it as a focus point to trim down the murder content. Eventually they succeeded and it was removed.
After a few months the dominating editor did adapt my references and enter the information I had outlined in my Talk page protests, but not until they got me banned. My banning was based on a remark I made on the Talk page saying that actually the evidence did strongly support Michael Jeffery having murdered Jimi Hendrix, counter to what the dominating dark siders were saying. They didn't like the fact I had succeeded in getting a separate page created on Jimi's death and were bitter. So an uber moderator with a special bold-highlighted avatar swooped in and condemned me for violating the Wikipedia "Defamation of Living Persons Policy" for saying that about Jeffery. I appealed saying that the banning wasn't valid because Michael Jeffery had been dead since 1973. What I got was weirdoes who seem to be drunk on their Wikipedia appeal board power giving me form answers to my appeal saying it was denied "Because I failed to show signs that I understood why I was banned or that I would not be a threat to Wikipedia in the future." And this was aimed at a person who was solely responsible for pointing the Hendrix editors towards the right books and correct information that was recorded as being responsible for forming the final page. One of my appeal deniers had a description next to his avatar saying "I am an ethereal entity" (Nutty phonies). No answer to my clear good case that I was banned unfairly by incompetent moderators acting politically who don't know what they are talking about while posing as persons concerned over serious rules violations. It seems the Wiki-Nazis don't have much respect for their own rules when it comes to them.
The Death Of Hendrix Talk page is now mostly blank. It used to be frequented and full of comments. Wikipedia erases the Talk page periodically so you can't see the evidence of their wicked wrongdoing and corruption. After my banning few people are willing to make comments on the Talk page. Nor am I able to correct their presently-existing seriously false information. With me gone the Death Of Jimi Hendrix page now contains a very important strategic entry that most people won't catch. I believe it was deliberately put there by CIA editors tracking the page. In the description of Hendrix's autopsy it says London Coroner's Office autopsist, the world famous Dr Donald Teare, found a blood alcohol content of 100mg/100ml. Analysis of Hendrix's autopsy data sheets will show that the real blood alcohol content found by Dr Teare was actually a tiny 5mg/100ml and that, realizing how unexplainably low it was, Dr Teare then estimated a 100mg level at time of ingestion of the pills. Nowhere does the Wikipedia article detail that Dr Teare was making this estimate because he was operating on Monika Dannemann's false timeline that was off by 6-7 hours. Of course, as Dr Teare assumed, a 100mg blood alcohol content would help explain the drug/alcohol conflict overdose of the official story, however true examination of the circumstances of Jimi's death shows he never had that level. So while Wikipedia poses itself as acting under serious rules of the most accurate reliable sources, it actually fights to retain misleading false information on serious matters while banning those who try to correct it on false charges.
The failed porno film-maker Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales, who comes from the same political hinterland as McAdams, occassionally goes on Wikipedia to appeal for user donations. The whole time running a dirty shop based on the domination of power-abusing editors and moderators who know how to use dirty tricks to maintain that power.
If anyone organizes a lawsuit against Wales and Wikipedia please let me know.
.
Just like you describe there were certain conservative editors that kept entering the Talk page to complain that the murder theories were just that and violated Wikipedia content policy. They especially focused on Tappy Wright's unproven claim that he heard Michael Jeffery confess to murdering Jimi. The dark members kept removing the Tappy Wright entry using it as a focus point to trim down the murder content. Eventually they succeeded and it was removed.
After a few months the dominating editor did adapt my references and enter the information I had outlined in my Talk page protests, but not until they got me banned. My banning was based on a remark I made on the Talk page saying that actually the evidence did strongly support Michael Jeffery having murdered Jimi Hendrix, counter to what the dominating dark siders were saying. They didn't like the fact I had succeeded in getting a separate page created on Jimi's death and were bitter. So an uber moderator with a special bold-highlighted avatar swooped in and condemned me for violating the Wikipedia "Defamation of Living Persons Policy" for saying that about Jeffery. I appealed saying that the banning wasn't valid because Michael Jeffery had been dead since 1973. What I got was weirdoes who seem to be drunk on their Wikipedia appeal board power giving me form answers to my appeal saying it was denied "Because I failed to show signs that I understood why I was banned or that I would not be a threat to Wikipedia in the future." And this was aimed at a person who was solely responsible for pointing the Hendrix editors towards the right books and correct information that was recorded as being responsible for forming the final page. One of my appeal deniers had a description next to his avatar saying "I am an ethereal entity" (Nutty phonies). No answer to my clear good case that I was banned unfairly by incompetent moderators acting politically who don't know what they are talking about while posing as persons concerned over serious rules violations. It seems the Wiki-Nazis don't have much respect for their own rules when it comes to them.
The Death Of Hendrix Talk page is now mostly blank. It used to be frequented and full of comments. Wikipedia erases the Talk page periodically so you can't see the evidence of their wicked wrongdoing and corruption. After my banning few people are willing to make comments on the Talk page. Nor am I able to correct their presently-existing seriously false information. With me gone the Death Of Jimi Hendrix page now contains a very important strategic entry that most people won't catch. I believe it was deliberately put there by CIA editors tracking the page. In the description of Hendrix's autopsy it says London Coroner's Office autopsist, the world famous Dr Donald Teare, found a blood alcohol content of 100mg/100ml. Analysis of Hendrix's autopsy data sheets will show that the real blood alcohol content found by Dr Teare was actually a tiny 5mg/100ml and that, realizing how unexplainably low it was, Dr Teare then estimated a 100mg level at time of ingestion of the pills. Nowhere does the Wikipedia article detail that Dr Teare was making this estimate because he was operating on Monika Dannemann's false timeline that was off by 6-7 hours. Of course, as Dr Teare assumed, a 100mg blood alcohol content would help explain the drug/alcohol conflict overdose of the official story, however true examination of the circumstances of Jimi's death shows he never had that level. So while Wikipedia poses itself as acting under serious rules of the most accurate reliable sources, it actually fights to retain misleading false information on serious matters while banning those who try to correct it on false charges.
The failed porno film-maker Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales, who comes from the same political hinterland as McAdams, occassionally goes on Wikipedia to appeal for user donations. The whole time running a dirty shop based on the domination of power-abusing editors and moderators who know how to use dirty tricks to maintain that power.
If anyone organizes a lawsuit against Wales and Wikipedia please let me know.
.