Wholesale 'improvements' on Wiki Waffen SS sites

[Seaburn]

For some time now I’ve been concerned about the editing of information on wiki sites that concern the W-SS by one person who appears to be making it their sole business cut them to the bone, leaving only in most cases war crime information. While I have no issue with war crime info being there, to obliterate so much other useful information leaves a putrid smell akin to a book burning in my nostrils which only the likes of Goebbels would have approved of. While Wiki was never something that could be relied on and would definitely benefit from removing the trash, IMO one person deciding that they are the last word on what’s in and what’s out is more than worrisome. Check out the sites of that concern the WSS and then look at them in another language to see the difference.

This person has a voluminous page about themselves and among the vast information present they have decided which authors they consider worthy and therefore can be quoted by the pages and who they personally consider dodgy which will then incur a delete. You will note that they have a distinct dislike of ‘poetic language’ which of course usually refers to those who praise or promote but not to those who condemn. For anyone who may approve of this dictatorial style, you can leave a thank you note in their helpful ‘fan mail’ section........

In all honesty I haven’t had the time to fully study these wholesale changes, but each time I go to look something up and see a page is considerably smaller than it was, there is that one name always on the edit history page – So If anyone else has an insight into this and has found that these changes are actually all above reproach, I would be delighted to hear it.

It would be truly depressing if it was more about someone’s large ego.....

[Mark C. Yerger]

For some time now I’ve been concerned about the editing of information on wiki sites that concern the W-SS by one person who appears to be making it their sole business cut them to the bone, leaving only in most cases war crime information. While I have no issue with war crime info being there, to obliterate so much other useful information leaves a putrid smell akin to a book burning in my nostrils which only the likes of Goebbels would have approved of. While Wiki was never something that could be relied on and would definitely benefit from removing the trash, IMO one person deciding that they are the last word on what’s in and what’s out is more than worrisome. Check out the sites of that concern the WSS and then look at them in another language to see the difference.

This person has a voluminous page about themselves and among the vast information present they have decided which authors they consider worthy and therefore can be quoted by the pages and who they personally consider dodgy which will then incur a delete. You will note that they have a distinct dislike of ‘poetic language’ which of course usually refers to those who praise or promote but not to those who condemn. For anyone who may approve of this dictatorial style, you can leave a thank you note in their helpful ‘fan mail’ section........

In all honesty I haven’t had the time to fully study these wholesale changes, but each time I go to look something up and see a page is considerably smaller than it was, there is that one name always on the edit history page – So If anyone else has an insight into this and has found that these changes are actually all above reproach, I would be delighted to hear it.

It would be truly depressing if it was more about someone’s large ego.....

Been happening for some time I've been told and you're correct; ego and also opinion. Wikapedia on the topic remains what it is; free, opinionated, mostly inaccurate and/or superficial. You get what you pay for. If want to know read books; most Wikapedia is from poster chosen texts with a lot out stated being of context or frequently copied wrong. Hardly a viable source for documented specifics. If a poster did the actual research, would write a book. Obviously they can't, though your topic is a matter of 1 person's self-appointed as gospel opinion. I'm told he deletes any source with any veteran contact or material contribution as "wrong" (a la Goebbels).

But it's fine for those of the mindset that all TV is accurate and the History Channel infallible despite the same 4-5 people being expert advisors or commentators on everything.

[Mark C. Yerger]

I never waste time on Wikapedia, but I just posted 2 quoted, wartime documents (archive held by the USA) on the entry for Otto Weidinger. Also a line from a properly published books with ISBN info, publisher, etc. No doubt the person mentioned in the thread will delete. Facts aren't necessarily what he wants or approves of.

I didn't bother to mention or cite Weidinger's individual and formally published biography.

Keep in mind Wikapedia has a biography of a LONG since banned dealer listed as an "expert" on everything, "noted author" and similar hilarity.

Wikapedia is frequently the web equal to "junk" magazines about members of the entertainment industry sold near where we pay for groceries in food stores..............

[Ron Weinand]

Good job Mark

[Reichsword]

[
Wikapedia is frequently the web equal to "junk" magazines about members of the entertainment industry sold near where we pay for groceries in food stores..............[/QUOTE]

Well said !

[Michael Fay]

as anyone can post anything- it makes sense anyone can delete.
As such, I have never trusted or liked Wikipedia.

This has been a problem for world governments' whose posts on "how wonderful their nation is," gets changed to "how bad they are" by that nation's rivals.
A documented example is the editing/posting war with Turkey and Armenia as to the reality of the Armenian genocide.

[Klaus Richter]

k.e. coffman is the individual.....very sad...

[Herr Lyppe]

I'm surprised that anyone thinks to use wikipedia for anything other than popular culture nonsense.
Actually really surprised that anyone who frequents sites such as this would go there at all.
The upside is that it reinforces the inimitable value of well researched books.

[Mark C. Yerger]

Lack of knowledge and forced opinion has always bred ignorance. Fortunately, for those having data interest in my narrow area, I do not compile my research for Wikapedia or television.

Sadly, both are heavily used by pseudo authors for undocumented and biased perspective or information. Along with students eager who eventually prove that possession of their university degree is no proof of knowledge or intellect.

[Ruimteaapje]

k.e. coffman is the individual.....very sad...

Some years ago I wrote three wiki-articles: Knittel (RK, DKiG, NKSG), Wawrzinek (DKiG) and Leidreiter (DKiG). Coffman butchered them all, reducing them to a fraction of the original text because my sources were supposedly "unreliable" even when I referred to NARA or BA-MA files. All info about their personal lifes and most details about their wartime careers were deleted. In Knittel's case he added a warcrime of the AA LAH Knittel could not have taken part in, allowing me afterwards to add sourced info why he was not involved but not allowing me to delete reference to the Jefremivka massacre despite clearly not relating to Knittel. My detailed description of the crimes of Kampfgruppe Knittel in the Ardennes obviously did stay up even when I did not bother to properly cite sources there. After that I did not care much about the deplorable state the articles are in, adding more info would be a waste of my time though I could simply put back the deleted sections now referring to my own book as source. It would probably just earn me a place among Coffman's listed "extreme admirers".


Apparently he has a strong opion about Mark Yerger and his publications...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:K...an#Mark_Yerger

Waffen-SS 'gurus'

Gurus are the authors who are popular among the readers who romanticize the German army, and, in particular, the Waffen-SS. Stages of ascension:

Self-publishing
Small presses: Schiffer Publishing, Bibliophile Legion Books, Merriam Press
Top of the line: Fedorowicz. "To be published through Fedorowicz is to have arrived."

MO:

Gurus do not write history at all, for this would require an interpretive framework, rather, they are creating the basis for a fictional community, which they bid the reader to enter.
The favorite outfit of the gurus is the Waffen-SS: better armed; better trained: acting as 'fire brigades', esp in the East
Therefore, more dramatic victories and more harrowing escapes - grist for the mill of the 'romancers'. "Aura of heroism, sacrifice, virtue, and ultimate tragedy that infuses [the guru's] work."

Mark Yerger

11 books, most through Schiffer Publishing; one contained foreword by Otto Baum, condemning the 'foolish and unfair treatment [of Waffen-SS] at Nuremberg' and 'false or enflamed representations from the time following the war that continue to the present'
Yerger's heros: Otto Kumm, whose 'leadership [of his unit] was both incredible as well as legendary'; Otto Weidinger
These and other Waffen-SS veterans "influenced Yerger away from objectivity"

[Klaus Richter]

His goal is to negate anything that shows any German soldier in a positive light. Whether it is battlefield bravery or leadership, and focus on portraying them all as criminals. I want real factual history. The positive and the negative, books like Parker's Peiper bio, and Timo's Knittel bio are the best because they don't whitewash or demonize, they present everything factually. Coffman has a clear political agenda, not a historical one.

[Herr Lyppe]

Hahahaha! I know that I shouldn't laugh and I'm sure that he's caused distress to some, but what a self righteous w@n*&r!

[Seaburn]

While we all agree that Wiki is riddled with inaccuracies and should never be used as a form of reference by any serious researcher, this is a sidebar to the point of the initial post.

The reality is that it is the first site that will appear when you key in a unit or personality and therefore anyone who has an agenda to control the information put there will actually have a lot of influence on public perception whether we like it or not .............. and that can be quite sinister if someone is biased and sets about wholesale to autocratically set the rules on what authors and sources they alone deem are permissible and what information already there can then be deleted.

The list may surprise many:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:K.e.coffman

It will get to the stage that to be an author placed on his 'nasty list' will be a badge of honour !

[pimberg]

All very well stated Seaburn.

[Herr Lyppe]

Unfortunately Seabird, this is the way that it has always been. Without even reading the dribble written below it, a quick scan over the list makes this fool's agenda blatantly obvious, and his ilk is a dime a dozen.
Thankfully, anyone who has a genuine interest in the subjects that may lead them to his page will see him for what he is. Anyone that agrees with and reinforces his views was already on the same page.
As with anything as distasteful as this bloke, just ignore them. Devoting any time discussing or arguing with him only lends his puerile existence legitimacy.