Here’s Proof of Wikipedia hypocrisy on Advertising

Here’s proof of Guy Chapmans “JZG” Administrator (Wikipedia hypocrisy), If you have a look at Guy’s article on “Notability” in Wikipedia and then click on the (My personal websites) which brings you to… yes you guessed it, to Guy’s very own Chapmancentral” website and If you further click on this link from the Chapman central page http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk:8080/ it brings you to his “Commercial” affiliate advertising links page where you can readily see that Guy is obviously making money from advertising products such as BBC and Lotus software etc from his website. And is it a coincidense that the BBC News is therefore allowed to edit its own pages in Wikipedia see this link or is Guy Chapman the mystery person behind these edits on behalf of BBC, makes one wonder.

It’s clear that Wikipedia can be a very lucrative money spinner for their “chosen” administrators, and it makes sense why Guy has chosen to chase the money instead and ignore the tsunami of negative public opinion against his hostile conduct on the internet while working for Wikipedia.

What this proves is that Guy Chapman aka “JZG” is using Wikipedia as an advertising platform to advance his own endeavours by advertising his own website not to mention “Linking” to it, even though he forcefully exerts that these practices are not allowed in Wikipedia. Have a look at this website which shows clearly the Guy Chapman (Wikipedia) hypocrisy when it comes to editing anything in Wikipedia.

The question is why is Guy allowed to get away with this? Is the Wikimedia Foundation rewarding Guy for his Purposely Negative and hostile modus operandi by in return allowing him to advertise other advertisers and marketing affiliates from his own website, or is he directly on the Wikipedia “payroll”, to answer the edit for payment practice in Wikipedia see this “blog”.

This brings me to the utimate question regarding “Advertising” in Wikipedia, are all the companies who are allowed to show info about their products and services in Wikipedia some how persuaded to make a “purchase” (Bribe) from the Wikimedia Foundation say in a form of a “donation” because this would explain why some companies are allowed to “advertise” in Wikipedia while others are not, and its got absolutely nothing to do with “Notability” as I have shown in the Guy Chapman “JzG” case above.

To see a good example about Advertising and company article editing contributions into Wikipedia, see the following article titled Wikipedia Tececo Ecopave and Eco-cement.

NOTE THIS DISCLAIMER: The Possibly related posts: (automatically generated) text if appearing below is automatically generated by the WordPress bot and has nothing to do with the Author (Susanfg) of this Article.

Advertisements

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://susanfg.wordpress.com/2008/05/31/heres-proof-of-wikipedia-hypocracy-on-advertising/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: