Opinion? What's that?
Published on September 3, 2008 By kryo In Internet

Ah, Wikipedia. Savior of internet debaters and bane of those who try to set themselves in a positive light against the connected masses. And now, apparently, the Department of Homeland Security is relying on it to reinforce their own legal arguments. Or maybe not.

It seems that the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals had to tell the DHS and the Board of Immigration Appeals that Wikipedia is no excuse for evidence to use in their proceedings. In this particular case, an Ethiopian woman had entered with false papers, seeking asylum. The DHS and Immigration dutifully looked up her real papers from back home on Wikipedia and decided (based on the wiki article about the documents she was using) that they weren't good enough proof of identity.

You'd think that it should be common sense--Wikipedia is great for learning about stuff in general when you're bored, but given that there's no requirement of actual knowledge in order to edit entries there, it's pretty commonly agreed that it shouldn't be used for anything where documentation and proof are important.

But with the government and anything internet-related, it seems more often than not that sense is anything but common...


Comments (Page 1)
5 Pages1 2 3  Last
on Sep 03, 2008

I'm not sure if I'd accept a wikipedia article as identity proof either, but I kind of laugh when people look down on Wikipedia as a reference for facts and information.

The journal Nature did a study comparing the number of inaccuracies in Wikipedia compared to the Encyclopedia Britanica.  They found an average of 2.92 mistakes per article for Britannica and 3.86 for Wikipedia.   Not bad when you think about it.

on Sep 03, 2008

To clarify, they looked at an article about the documents she was using. Like looking at an article about US drivers licenses to see whether they count as official documents, instead of looking at the law or contacting the issuing government.

on Sep 03, 2008

To clarify, they looked at an article about the documents she was using. Like looking at an article about US drivers licenses to see whether they count as official documents, instead of looking at the law or contacting the issuing government.

I am sure it is not humous to her, but I do find it funny.

on Sep 03, 2008

But with the government and anything internet-related, it seems more often than not that sense is anything but common...

Just those two things?

Common sense is anything but common. Period.

on Sep 03, 2008

Common sense is anything but common. Period.

It is an endangered species.

on Sep 03, 2008

The problem with people is that they find that Wikipedia is 100% accurate. Research paper, maybe, so I think some people are Ludites, but not court-level evidence.

on Sep 03, 2008

Wikipedia is a novel approach to a "cloud based" encyclopedia, but it isn't set up with a 'review board' or experts who comb through the contributions constantly, verifying and certifying them. As such it could never meet the standard demanded in the Rules of Evidence. The Judge ruled correctly.

After all. would anyone agree to a person whose credentials as a Neurosurgeon were not verified by a duly recognized  body 'popping your top'? I think not.

on Sep 04, 2008

Wikipedia is a novel approach to a "cloud based" encyclopedia, but it isn't set up with a 'review board' or experts who comb through the contributions constantly, verifying and certifying them. As such it could never meet the standard demanded in the Rules of Evidence. The Judge ruled correctly.
After all. would anyone agree to a person whose credentials as a Neurosurgeon were not verified by a duly recognized body 'popping your top'? I think not.

And yet the study I spoke of found 2.92 mistakes per article in the Britanica.

on Sep 04, 2008

And yet the study I spoke of found 2.92 mistakes per article in the Britanica.

Computers have made mistakes easier to find and identify.  And in some cases, also to disseminate false information.  I doubt anyone could have gotten that 2.92 figure from a printed version of Britanica.

on Sep 04, 2008

Then she's a dumbass and needs to be sent back. If one is seeking asylum, no papers are needed. It's more likely she presented false papers...and when busted for doing so, attempted to change her status from 'immigrant' to 'refugee.'

Or it's all just an Urban Legend ;~D

on Sep 04, 2008

I don't care what country you hail from, when your very first act in America is breaking the law, (ie: presenting falsified documents of identity) you need to be sent back home, preferably after serving a few years in prison for even trying.

Not on my dime! Why should I support illegal aliens in jail? How does that make my life better? How does that deter (like anyone in Ethiopa would know or care? They'd take the risk!) ?

Naah...maybe forced extradition is the answer, maybe not. But there's gotta be a better way than this! In the country that put man on the moon, I refuse to believe we can't find a better way, and that includes every illegal alien. They are de facto security risks and should be dealt with by physical and documentation/credentialling barriers. They and their offspring should not be allowed to "profit" from the illegal act of undocumented immigration.

I know I'll probably catch hell for that, but that's the way I see it. 

 

on Sep 04, 2008

They are de facto security risks and should be dealt with by physical and documentation/credentialling barriers.
Catch them, tattoo thier forehead, and send them packing, right? 

on Sep 04, 2008

"But with the government and anything internet-related, it seems more often than not that sense is anything but common... "

 

Oho! ZING!!

on Sep 04, 2008

They are de facto security risks and should be dealt with by physical and documentation/credentialling barriers.Catch them, tattoo thier forehead, and send them packing, right? 

Nah....tag them with GPS locators, then ship their asses back and make sure they stay there.

on Sep 04, 2008

I'll support that idea little-whip. But...make sure there's 10 feet of wall BELOW the ground too. If you're gonna do something, do it right.

 

BTW, I live in Southern California.

5 Pages1 2 3  Last