Consumer Action Group on Wikipedia

[DonkeyB]

Doing a bit of research for a thread, I looked up CAG on Wiki - and noticed that, near the end, there are comments saying how CAG's popularity is falling and they hardly ever appear in the media. What tosh!

 

Wouldn't it be interesting to find out who edited the page and added these nasty bits? Wonder if any DCA 's IP addresses would surface? Anyone know how to find out?

 

Look here:

 

Consumer Action Group - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[cirian75]

That change has the users IP logged, that IP has done nothing else at all in Wiki.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=50&tagfilter=&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=86.152.174.108&namespace=&tagfilter=&year=&month=-1

 

 

past and old

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Consumer_Action_Group&diff=prev&oldid=313062550

[ScabHunter]

I also notice that they are estimating membership at between 20,000 and 25,000. According to the site itself the current figure is 236,893. Quite a difference.

 

SH

[Bookworm]

Awww bless the pathetic little runts, they also edited the numbers of registered users etc...

 

Obviously WAYYY too much time on their hands.

[DonkeyB]

Looks like the IP links to BT a broadband node in Bradford... not far from Leeds... can't think of any CAG-haters near there... snigger!

 

Highly malicious editing.

[Tartan Barty]

The Site does not tolerate any form of potentially libelous postings and err on the side of caution as, 'to even defend such an action from a large corporation would probably end in the site's demise'. However, rude and abusive comments against reputable companies are commonplace.

For instance, when a forum poster in dispute recently libeled a small UK Web Hosting firm Weycrest.Com Limited accusing its Director of moving assets to another limited company to avoid paying his County Court claim, rather than giving the company a right of reply it pulled the post entirely, citing "Data Protection" issue's.

 

That will be from all the scan's of DCA's letters then:)

 

Sounds just like what the site team would write to promote the site!

[sillygirl1]

Very malicious considering the amount of media coverag Marc Gander has had lately, two articles in a year is clearly libel...

 

One wonders if the 'lowlife' actually has a life, I've noticed that membership goes UP over the weekends, I think its due to the fact that people no longer feel safe using the internet at work for sites like this, might alert the 'wrong' people in the company to their potential problems.

 

Don't know about other peoples views but I think somebody from the site management team should contact Wiki asap and correct the article, perhaps including a direct link to the site as well.

[Bookworm]

I think you're barking up the wrong tree. From past experience and knowledge, I think you'd find that the culprits are highly likely to be -supposedly - from the same side as ours, but can not let go of their bitterness of failing to get the same success as CAG. It is petty jealousy, nothing more, and that makes it even more sad, at least if the attack was from DCAs or banks you could understand their anger, but in this instance, it is likely to be no more than bilious envy. :rolleyes:

 

What's more, I'd take a bet that amongst the current 14 watchers of this thread, a few will be some of them come to see the reaction to their little act of vandalism. Oh well, at least that will create some activity on their side whilst they congratulate themselves on their cleverness and sense of fun, the way hooligans think defacing statues or ancient treasures makes them look grown-up whilst the rest of the world watches in contempt.

[DonkeyB]

And a wise old head you are, Bookworm. It's very hard to trace unless someone does it from an office or business. These were, I think, out-of-hours amendments. But I get the impression your seasoned brain knows something I don't...!