Mediaboss Marketing

What started as a series of lyrical jabs between the two hip hop moguls Drake and Kendrick Lamar soon escalated into a full-blown feud incorporating several diss tracks. Following constant subtle shots, the feud reignited with Lamars aggressive verses on his various tracks, including Like That and Euphoria, prompting a back-and-forth rap battle between the two.

And for the fans, who are eager to delve into the intricacies massive feud, Wikipedia has facilitated a homage with a page sharing the details and timeline of the rap battle. However, it seems that Wikipedia has gone a bit far in its attempt to capture the essence of the feud, formatting more akin to the chronicles of a war.

While Wikipedia might not always be the most trusted source of information, the renowned website has recently caught the attention of fans for a page chronicling the details and timeline of the rap battle between Drake and Kendrick Lamar.

The page goes into the intricate details surrounding their background and initial collaboration in the early 2010s and how it recently escalated into a much broader feud involving the two hip-hop heavyweights.

It also features several other celebrities who have been named or have supported either of the rappers in the conflict. One of the music stars who supported the 37-year-old singer-rapper included J.Cole. He released a song in April 2024 responding to Lamars Like That.

However, he issued a public apology and retracted his diss track, 7 Minute Drill, just two days after its release. This move marked his withdrawal from the ongoing feud between Drake and Lamar and is summarized on the Wikipedia page with the detail Until April 7, 2024.

Fans cant help but share some amusing responses to the details mentioned on the Wikipedia page, describing the ongoing feud as 1 month, 2 weeks and 1 day long and exchanging serious allegations against each other by employing the methods of diss tracks.

The depiction of Drake and Kendrick Lamars feud on Wikipedia has sparked humorous and amusing responses from fans, particularly how it states J. Coles involvement in the feud. Taking to X (Twitter), one user said, how the page made J. Cole look like he died in the war.

Many even demanded to see the 39-year-old rapper on both sides, considering his initial diss for Lamar and later apologizing for the same. Put J.Cole on both sides, one fan argued. Others found amusement in the detailed information provided on the page, including the specific duration of the feud being noted as 1 month, 2 weeks, 1 day long.

Another fan stated how Not even Jay Z n Nas got a Wiki page like this LMAOO this so crazy. Along with sharing their amusing reactions, fans have also expressed unwavering support for their favorite rapper in the ongoing feud.

The feud does not seem to be taking a break anytime soon, with Drake recently releasing another diss track, The Heart Pt. 6 in response to Lamars Meet the Grahams and Not Like Us, as he debunked the allegations about his daughter and shifted the focus on Lamars girlfriend, Whitney Alford.

Read the original post:
Made J. Cole look like he died in the war: Drake vs Kendrick Lamar Rap Battle Gets a World War 2 Styled Wikipedia ... - FandomWire

Did you miss the members of Mastodon playWikipedia: Fact or Fiction?

Don't fret. We've had a ton of rockers on the series over the years, so it can be hard to keep track of what episodes we have, especially if you're a recent reader and subscriber. So we've been making compilation episodes, organizing them either by artist or by genre, so that fans can see all of their favorites in one video.

GuitaristBill Kelliher and bassist Troy Sanders both participated in our video series at different points, so we combined clips from each of their episodes into one video, which you can check out below.

"What is this, is this someone's thought or opinion?" Sanders asked during the video. "It's written, so it must be true."

You'll hear about the basics, such as the members' upbringings, how they formed Mastodon and so on, but also some fun facts like how they ended up being invited to appear inGame of Thrones.

READ MORE:Guns N' Roses Play 'Wikipedia: Fact or Fiction?'

And if you're itching to see Mastodon live, they're set to head out with Lamb of God starting in July for a North American Ashes of the Leviathanrun with Kerry King and Malevolence. Check out all the dates on their website.

Loudwire's picks for the best rock and metal albums from 2000 to present.

Gallery Credit: by Loudwire Staff

Here is the original post:
Mastodon Play 'Wikipedia: Fact or Fiction?' - Loudwire

Toto Wolff has contacted Max Verstappen to explain his much-discussed Wikipedia statements. The Mercedes team boss stressed that his comment belongs in a certain context and that he does respect such records.

When Verstappen took his tenth Formula 1 victory in a row at the Italian Grand Prix, he broke the record, which until then was held by Sebastian Vettel. The Mercedes team boss caused a stir by stating that records did not interest him that much and that they were "only interesting for Wikipedia, which nobody reads anyway".

Wolff soon realised that he might not have been better off making that statement, as he was frequently asked about it two weeks later in Singapore. Even then, the 51-year-old Austrian acknowledged that he has made more intelligent statements before, but now he also reveals that he contacted the three-time world champion that same weekend.

Article continues under ad

"I sent Max a message to explain and he was OK with it," Wolff said in conversation with De Telegraaf. "If you don't know the context, it seems like I don't recognise such a great record. But the point was that Niki Lauda used to always laugh at records with us. He called it a relic of the past and always looked forward. That's the story behind it, but it wasn't the most intelligent thing I ever said."

Read more:
Wolff contacted Verstappen to explain Wikipedia statement - GPblog

George Washington Masonic Memorial at Night (photo via Daniel Horowitz)

A nighttime photo of the George Washington Masonic National Memorial in Old Town took fifth place in the Wiki Loves Monuments 2023 photo contest.

The annual contest, held by Wikipedia, highlights photographs of historic sites from the National Register of Historic Places.

Photographer Daniel Horowitz, who specializes in nighttime and long-exposure photography, took sixth place in the competition last year with a photo of a British fortress on Lake Champlain. Horowitzs photo of the George Washington Masonic National Memorial won fifth place in the 2023 competition.

According to Wikimedia:

This night-time photograph showcases the George Washington Masonic National Memorial in Alexandria, Virginia. The memorial, a National Historic Landmark, stands as a modern tribute to the architecture of the ancient Lighthouse of Alexandria, one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World. Captured in a long-exposure shot, the moving clouds create a dynamic backdrop to the illuminated structure, emphasizing its grandeur and its importance as a Masonic site and historical edifice.

See the article here:
George Washington Masonic Memorial photo honored in Wikipedia photo competition - ALXnow

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Reddit Email Print

Three minutes read

Wikipedia, the crowd-sourced online encyclopedia, has emerged as a vast repository of information, accessible to millions globally. However, the platforms open editing model has also made it susceptible to manipulation and bias, raising concerns about the reliability of its content. Malign actors, including the terrorist regime in Iran, have been known to organize coordinated editing campaigns to influence the content on Wikipedia and thus mislead a population that strives for the truth.

On January 7, the Times of London reported that Wikipedia entries have been changed to downgrade Iranian human rights atrocities and other abuses, raising concerns that agents or supporters are using the site to manipulate publicly available information about the hostile regime. Information has also been changed to discredit Iranian dissident groups, while government publications have been presented as impartial news sources on the free online encyclopedia.

On January 15, Dr. Majid Rafizadeh, a political scientist and board member of the Harvard International Review, wrote in Townhall, Wikipedia, relying on a community of volunteers to edit and maintain its content, has become a prime target for spreading disinformation and state propaganda. While Wikipedia has guidelines in place to ensure neutrality and accuracy, these guidelines can be manipulated and abused by well-organized and well-financed groups that infiltrate the site.

Explaining how Tehran has succeeded in feeding Wikipedia pages with unverified accusations as factual content on Wikipedia, Dr. Rafizadeh adds, The Iranian government has been known to spend significant sums of money to manipulate Western journalists and portray the principal Iranian opposition group, Mujahedin-e-Khalq, as a cult. These efforts involve social media campaigns, dissemination of fake news, provision of grants for biased reports, and even direct hiring of reporters. By presenting unverified claims as facts, the regime seeks to discredit its main opposition and shape public opinion.

For instance, on the English language Wikipedia page for Peoples Mojahedin Organization of Iran, the writing suggests that At one point the MEK was Irans largest and most active armed dissident group, [18] and it is still sometimes presented by Western political backers as a major Iranian opposition group,[19][20][21] but it is also deeply unpopular today within Iran, largely due to its siding with Iraq in IranIraq War.[22][23]

The sources of this statement, which carries a significant amount of misinformation, are articles from reputable outlets. However, its noteworthy that the authors, who have historically expressed hostile views toward the organization, contribute to the narrative.

Notably, Saeed Kamali Dehghan, a reporter for The Guardian often cited in support of these claims, has a professional history with Fars News Agency, operated by Irans Revolutionary Guards (IRGC). For the record, heres the linkto his old press card.

For a regime whose official representatives openly admit that suppressing the MEK is the primary focus in any negotiation with foreign nations, it is not surprising that the manipulation of information sources for those seeking to understand the regimes primary perceived threat is prevalent. Consequently, the Persian-language Wikipedia page on the MEK, with more than 9,000 words, is evidently crafted with bias and contains a substantial amount of misinformation and disinformation.

However, the battle to dominate the narratives is not unique to the regime in Iran.

On October 17, 2022, Wired Magazine wrote, Governments have good reasons to influence Wikipedia: 1.8 billion unique devices are used to visit Wikimedia Foundation sites each month, and its pages are regularly among the top results for Google searches.

In 2021, a Chinese Wikipedia editor was found to have spent years writing 200 articles of fabricated history of medieval Russia, complete with imaginary states, aristocrats, and battles, Wired adds while also noting, Governments also often have more blunt tools at their disposal. Over the years, authoritarian leaders have blocked the site,taken its governing organization to court, andarrested its editors.

As per Wireds investigations, the issue of self-serving Wikipedia edits has persisted on the platform for an extended period. In 2007, the tech magazine published a story detailing the findings of a Caltech graduate who meticulously traced millions of changes made to Wikipedia pages.

The result: A database of 34.4 million edits, performed by 2.6 million organizations or individuals ranging from the CIA to Microsoft to Congressional offices, now linked to the edits they or someone at their organizations net address has made, Wired reported. Some of this appears to be transparently self-interested, either adding positive, press release-like material to entries or deleting whole swaths of critical material.

Wikipedias open editing model allows users to create multiple accounts, known as sockpuppets, to amplify a particular viewpoint or control discussions. These accounts, often operated by a single entity, can be used to sway content in a desired direction. Deliberate insertion of false information, biased perspectives, or outright vandalism can occur on Wikipedia pages.

The scenario of Irans regime utilizing Wikipedia as a battleground for narrative control highlights the necessity for individuals to approach online information, particularly on sensitive topics like Iranian politics, with a discerning mindset. Navigating the vast sea of data demands meticulous fact-checking, logical analysis, and an appreciation of historical contexts.

In an era where information abundance coexists with susceptibility to manipulation, the resonance of the famous saying becomes evident: In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.

Continue reading here:
In the War for Narratives Iran's Regime Takes to Wikipedia - NCRI - National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI)