Steps to take.

One thing we should do is to ensure that anyone who tries to google “IIPM” gets a link to a page giving fair warning about the institute. We should aim to get this page into the top ten results, preferably the first result.

The obvious page? Why, the Wikipedia link for IIPM! It doesn’t contain much yet, but with your co-operation, it will soon. (Update: Now there is a fairly decent article! Please link to it.)
So here is what we should all do.

  1. Link to the page on your blog. Use the string “IIPM”. Put this in a post for now, but make sure that you put it somewhere where it will be permanently up. Everyone who has a blog can and should do this.
  2. Edit the entry above to write about the controversy. Use a neutral tone. Prefer reports of facts rather than judgements. For example. “IIPM is a slimy institute” is your judgement. That is liable to get edited out of Wikipedia. On the other hand, “IIPM has been described as a slimy institute by many blogs that were outraged by what they saw as its aggressive tactics” is better. It is not a judgement. It is a statement of fact that some other blogs have called it so. But better still, give the facts that will enable the reader to make that decision for himself. (“IIPM promises X, but students who attended have reported that they get Y instead.”)
  3. Keep a watch on the page. Create a user account and add it to your watchlist. Ensure that no one deletes sentences surreptitiously. If anyone writes exaggerated stuff about the institute, tone it down. Change the language from “The institute does …. ” to “The institute claims to do…. ” blah blah blah. You get the point?
  4. Tell everyone who will be interested to do the same. Post about this. Make sure that every blogger who cares gets involved and makes a post.
  5. Keep up the vigil. Make sure that the page stays alive and continues to give a fair picture even after the controversy dies down.

As you can see, I’ve made a start, but I’ve got to run right now. By the time I get on the net next, you guys should have an article ready.

16 thoughts on “Steps to take.”

  3. Ravi,
    I suggest some Mumbai/Chennai/Delhi blogger take the responsibility of doing a complete fact check so that people can use it to post their entries.

    I seriously want to make a Wiki entry, but I hardly know what IIPM is or how it works(for that matter, I do not know how those management guys with no idea about technical difficulties, fix my deadlines).

  5. I think that the media should be informed about all this. I think they are unaware because no one has written about it till now. So, I compiled a list of editors and it would be good if you mailed them too. You can find the list here.

  6. I urge you not to bring this controversy into Wikipedia. At least, there is no reason to delve into the finer details of the issue, like Gaurav quitting his job. IMHO, such things should be outside the purview of an encyclopedia.

    We all have done our best till now to show our solidarity, and now must be careful not to do too much. Let better sense prevail. Fight for free speech. Spare Wikipedia.

    Here’s my take on this: http://vkpedia.blogspot.com/2005/10/spare-wikipedia-please.html

  7. Hi Ravi,

    Why dont we try slashdot? I have already submitted a scoop to slashdot in the Your RIGHTS Online (Censorship section), but it is not published. Title could be something like “IBM Employee forced to resign for blogging.”

    Anon

  8. I agree with Vijay, Wikipedia is not the right place to google bomb. I suggest the original JAM Magazine article.


  9. Vijay,
    I think people have the right to correct information. They also have the ability to choose between bias and neutrality.

    Wikipedia is an excellent forum where even the common man can express his opinions and if supported with credible evidence, will only lead to more enlightenment for the less informed. Note that “credible evidence” is the key. I am sure there will be thousands of opinionated articles in Wikipedia and those that have evidence to support their stand have a higher chance of acceptance. So as far as I see it, it is all fair and good.

    Wikipedia allows for writing about current events with a caveat that the news is still evolving (as in this case). It also allows a user like you to put up a notice saying this article might reflect biased views. So I fail to see your problem at all. It seems a free and fair trial for the actions of IIPM. What is your concern?

    Moreover, the issue is not just free speech. It only became that recently. The issue originally was wrong advertising. Gaurav and Rashmi were not fighting free speech when they posted about IIPM. So your claim that this is just another “free speech” issue is incorrect.

    I really appreciate Ravikiran and other blogger’s efforts in this. I only request a sincere response – so that it does not become a blog-war of sorts. Like what happened in Rashmi’s blog. If we continue to monitor the article and edit exaggerations and half-truths whichever side they come from, I truly believe that the article will become an excellent guide for those looking for information on this institute.

    And those who look for info deserve that. Banning it from Wikipedia and asking them to go to blogs does not seem to be the answer.

  10. Some people have asked for a CBI enquiry. Why waste tax payers’ money on such a stupid thing. If we all act as good consumers we can prevent such humbugs from running a business.

    Good consumers make a good country (Wow!…How does that sound? Shall we make this the slogan for our movement? :-))

  11. Ravikiran,
    This is amazing initiative. I am spreading the word through email as much as I can.

    Vijay, I concur with Swami. Wikipedia hosts millions of entries and many of those are extremely frivolous such as this one, which is about a livejournal community that mocks fandom. I don’t see the need to mark the page as disputed or biased. That would do more harm than good.

  15. Pingback: DesiPundit » IIPM Blog Wars Redux
  16. Pingback: VKpedia » Blog Archive » Spare Wikipedia, please!

Comments are closed.