Mediaboss Marketing

After spending at least one year planning the brutal murder of their family, two teenage brothers in Oklahoma went on a killing spree but they were caught before they could flee the state to commit mass shootings in a bid to become famous.

According to Tulsa World, on July 22, 2015, Robert Bever, then 18, and Michael Bever, then 16, armed themselves with knives they had stockpiled at their home in Broken Arrow and methodically stabbed their parents, David Bever, 52, and April Bever, 44, their two brothers, Daniel, 12, and Christopher, 7, and their 5-year-old sister, Victoria.

A second sister, Crystal, then 13, survived the brutal attack despite suffering a slit neck, knife wounds to her abdomen and arms, and strangulation. A 2-year-old girl was spared from the violence because the killers forgot about her and she slept through the ordeal, detectives said.

During the room-by-room attack, Michael reportedly tricked his 7- and 5-year-old siblings, Christopher and Victoria, into opening the door of a bathroom where they were hiding by claiming he needed help because Robert was trying to stab him. Christopher suffered seven stab wounds, while Victoria was stabbed 18 times.

The killers 12-year-old brother, Daniel, managed to hide in a home office and phone 911 for help, but he was slain when Michael repeated the ruse that Robert was coming after him. When the boy opened the door, prosecutors said, Michael stepped to the side and told Robert: He's all yours.

When police responding to Daniels 911 call arrived at the Bever familys home, Robert and Michael fled. A police dog located the pair in nearby woods and they were placed under arrest.

In an interview with police while hospitalized, the surviving sister, Crystal, claimed her brother Robert once complained there were too many people in the world and he and their brother Michael were collecting knives and body armor, Tulsa World reported.

During a preliminary hearing in February 2016, Broken Arrow police detectives testified the two defendants goal was to outdo other mass killers, Tulsa World reported.

[Robert] expressed wanting to have some sort of fame or notoriety for being a serial killer, Detective Eric Bentz told the court. He said that if he killed more than one person, it made him like a god.

According to Bentz, Robert showed no remorse for what he had done and considered killing a hobby.

He was laughing or chuckling on several occasions, Bentz recalled of questioning the siblings after the deadly attack. He appeared calm and relaxed and mildly excited when telling the story [of the killings].

Detective Rhianna Russell said the murderous brothers intended to go on a mass-killing spree and nightly planned out the slayings. They wanted a Wikipedia page. They wanted media coverage.

The brothers reportedly hoped to make videos with their familys bodies before dismembering and storing them in their homes attic.

Robert wanted to make a video with him in the living room with the bodies visible, which would be seen by attorneys and law enforcement, Bentz said. He also wanted to make a second video that he said was less 'horrific' so it would go public [on YouTube]. He called it a G-rated video.

On Sept. 7, 2016, Robert accepted a plea deal to avoid the death penalty. A judge sentenced him to five life terms without the possibility of parole as well as one life term. He was given another three life sentences in 2020 after he attacked prison staff with a sharpened instrument.

On April 20, 2018, the trial began for Roberts younger brother and co-defendant, Michael, and he was found guilty three weeks later of five counts of first-degree murder. He was sentenced to five consecutive life sentences plus 28 years with the possibility of parole.

At a hearing, Michael told a Tulsa County district judge: Every minute and every second, Ive been thinking about what I could have done different and what kind of life I could have had with my family.

See the article here:
'They Wanted A Wikipedia Page': Oklahoma Brothers Murdered ... - Investigation Discovery

In recent years, biopics of famous musicians and artists have been increasingly popular, leading to immense success at the box office and during award season. Films like Bohemian Rhapsody, Elvis, Rocketman, I Wanna Dance With Somebody, and Love & Mercy have managed to honor the stories of legendary musicians in ways that appeal both to die hard fans and those who are unfamiliar with their music in the first place. Its easy to see why musician biopics are so popular: not only does working with these legendary artists give filmmakers a chance to utilize a great selection of songs, but the chaotic personal lives these performers lead provide a great basis for dramatic material. Theres often a built-in history that is more exciting than many fictional screenplays.

N.W.A. was one of the most influential rap groups of all-time, and it was inevitable that their story would be adapted for the big screen in some way. Straight Outta Compton had the benefit of being produced by Ice Cube and Dr. Dre, and was directed by F. Gary Gray. Although the film spans many years and incorporates many different sides of the music industry throughout the 1980s and 1990s, it is centered on the relationship between Eazy-E (Jason Mitchell), Ice Cube (OShea Jackson Jr.), and Dr. Dre (Corey Hawkins) as they grow up as childhood friends and leave a colossal impact on music, race relations, and culture during their careers together. While some musician biopics feel like nothing more than elevated Wikipedia articles, Straight Outta Compton shows the best that the genre can be.

Great musician biopics need to do something more than simply play the most iconic tracks from their artists discography. While its exciting to hear many of these great songs on the big screen, being nothing more than an elevated music video does not make a film worthy of the cinematic experience; additionally, this makes musician-based films harder to watch for those who arent familiar with the artists themselves. Thankfully, Straight Outta Compton does a great job at showing how inspiration begins. Its shown how over policing, societal injustice, and casual racism inspire Eazy-E, Ice Cube, and Dr. Dre to begin expressing themselves through music. Theyre inspired to use the gifts that they have to cast a spotlight on the injustice within the world, creating an empowering experience.

Related: The Best Musical Biopics, Ranked

Theres also time dedicated to showing how difficult crafting a future classic can be. One of the films best scenes is the extended recording process where Eazy-E performs "Boyz-n-the-Hood" for the first time; he lacks experience, and has to deal with humorous criticism from Dr. Dre and Ice Cube. However, he slowly gains enough confidence to take a different approach to his craft, and the film shows the instant ramifications that the song has.

Theres also a significant amount of time dedicated to the complex, and often corrupt world of record producing and financial deals. Paul Giamatti delivers one of his strongest performances as Jerry Heller, N.W.A.s initial producer. While Heller defends his clients in the face of police harassment, he later underpays them and gets caught in an embezzlement scheme.

Straight Outta Compton benefits from an extraordinary ensemble, and Gray does a great job at balancing the screen time so that each artist can be shown for all their flaws and attributes. While casting OShea Jackson Jr. as his father could have been seen as nepotism, Jackson proved his doubters wrong and delivered an outstanding performance that was far more than an impersonation. He showed Ice Cubes leadership skills in pushing the group to be more radical and speak up in the face of skepticism. However, Jackson also showed a more sensitive side to his father; a scene towards the end when he goes to a hospital to see a dying Eazy-E is tear-inducing.

Related: These Are Some of the Best Movies About Musicians

Hawkins also delved into the complexity of Dr. Dre as he grows involved in more salacious activities. Theres a charm to the early scenes of Dre lying on his bed and listening to records, but later on, Dre gets into more violent altercations with his partners. Creating an aura of raw genius isnt easy, but Hawkins showed the sort of creative dexterity that Dre had during a scene where he collaborated with Snoop Dogg (Lakeith Stanfield).

Mitchells performance was incredibly emotional, as Eazy-Es death weighs heavily on the films narrative. Chicago Sun Times critic Richard Roeper praised Mitchells charismatic, ultimately heartbreaking performance, and Rolling Stone critic Peter Travers said Mitchells work was awards-caliber. While Eazy-E isnt always shown in the most positive light, Mitchell explored how his traumatic experiences shaped him into becoming one of the most influential voices of his time.

The scenes in Straight Outta Compton that show the live performances are truly electrifying. While some musician biopics cut corners by only showing clips of the most famous records, Straight Outta Compton builds up audience anticipation before the biggest shows. The film does an excellent job at showing how the growing controversy around gangsta rap puts pressure on N.W.A. during their 1989 concert tour. Their performance in Detroit is empowering because of the defiance that they show, and the film captures the instant chaos and blowback that occur once the police attempt to block the performance. The audience understands how this show could be both thrilling and terrifying at the same time.

Its also interesting to see how the artists personal relationships inspire their work. After N.W.A. calls out Ice Cube in one of their records, Ice Cube gets his revenge with the diss track No Vaseline. Since Jackson shows how stung he was by the initial criticism, its understandable why Ice Cube would lash out in such a public way. The films well-rounded view of the rap world also includes terrific guest roles for artists like Suge Knight (R. Marcos Taylor), Shorty (LaDell Preston), Sir Jinx (Cleavon McClendon), and Warren G (Sheldon A. Smith). The overwhelming excellence of all the films performances earned it a Screen Actors Guild nomination for Outstanding Ensemble in a Motion Picture.

See the article here:
Why Straight Outta Compton Is One of the Best Music Biopics Ever ... - MovieWeb

Cochrane has a commitment to producing and sharing high quality health evidence to as broad an audience as possible. Cochrane partnered in 2014 with Wikipedia, with the joint goal of improving the quality and reliability of human health-related articles that people are accessing online.

Jennifer Dawson, PhD, is a Wikipedia Consultant for Cochrane. Her role includes maintaining and building further relations with Wikipedia, connecting new editors to the Wikipedia community, and supporting requests for engagement in Wikipedia work from the Cochrane community. We interviewed Jennifer to learn more about the Cochrane-Wikipedia partnership:

Why should we care about Wikipedia? Millions of people around the world access health-related information on Wikipedia each day. Medical-related articles are available in over 286 languages on Wikipedia and often come up early on an internet search. The readership base varies broadly and includes members of the public, medical students, medical professionals, journalists, and policy makers (More info here). Given that so many people are consulting Wikipedia on a daily basis, we feel that Cochranes commitment to producing and sharing high quality health evidence includes sharing that evidence where people are accessing it.

What's Cochrane's Community contribution to Wikipedia?As of 2023, 3400 Cochrane Systematic Reviews published in the past 10 years help inform evidence in medical articles shared on English Wikipedia. There are additional ongoing initiatives in other languages including Spanish, Dutch, and Farsi Wikipedias. Many Cochrane community members and volunteers participate in this initiative, collaborating with the Wikipedia editing community and using high-quality and trusted evidence to correct errors of omission, expand medical articles, and remove unreliable or outdated content shared on Wikipedia.

How can I get involved?Nearly half of all Cochrane Reviews are already shared on Wikipedia! Cochrane is presently the most frequently cited peer-reviewed medical journal on Wikipedia (More info here). But English Wikipedia includes over 36,000 health-related articles, so there are more Cochrane reviews that still can be shared on Wikipedia. There are two main ways you can get involved:

1. Add new Cochrane Evidence to Wikipedia - Every three months, a new list of Cochrane Reviews to consider for Wikipedia is generated. Reviews to consider for Wikipedia are organized by Cochrane Review Group and can be access here: Cochrane Review List (English).

2. Ensure that the evidence already shared on Wikipedia is accurate, unbiased, and up to date. - Volunteers are needed to review what is presently shared in Wikipedia. Wikipedia articles that include out dated versions of Cochrane Reviews need to be updated. Cochrane maintains a list of Reviews that need updating. This list is refreshed monthly to include recently updated Cochrane Reviews: Cochrane-Wikipedia Update Project.

How can I edit Wikipedia in languages other than English?Cochrane has active projects in many different languages including Spanish, French, and Dutch. Please visit the Projects tab project page to learn more about specific projects: Cochrane-Wikipedia Projects.

How can I learn how to edit Wikipedia?Cochrane has developed and collated numerous training resources. Our newest resource, the Wikipedian in Training Resource, is the best place to begin. This resource shares suggested first steps, ideas for how to practice editing, and an example of the general workflow of editing Wikipedia and sharing Cochrane evidence.

Jennifer can be found on Wikipedia at: JenOttawa and by email at jdawson@cochrane.org. Please visit the Cochrane-Wikipedia Project Page for more information.

Link:
The Cochrane-Wikipedia Partnership in 2023 - Cochrane

(THE CONVERSATION) What comes to mind when you think of Wikipedia?

Maybe you think of clicking link after link to learn about a topic, followed by another topic and then another. Or maybe youve heard a teacher or librarian tell you that what you read on Wikipedia isnt reliable.

Asresearchandinstruction librarians, we know people have concerns about using Wikipedia in academic work. And yet, in interacting with undergraduate and graduate students doing various kinds of research, we also see how Wikipedia can be an important source for background information, topic development and locating further information.

What exactly is Wikipedia?

Wikipedia, whichlaunched in 2001is a free online encyclopedia run by the nonprofit Wikimedia Foundation and written collaboratively by its users.

There are 10 rulesandfive pillarsfor contributing to the site. The five pillars establish Wikipedia as a free online encyclopedia, with articles that are accurate and cite reliable sources, and editors called Wikipedians who avoid bias and treat one another with respect.

Policies and guidelinesbuild upon the five pillars by establishing best practices for writing and editing on Wikipedia. Common issues that go against the guidelines, for example, includepaid editingandvandalism, which refers to editing an article in an intentionally malicious, offensive or libelous way.

Here are what we see as the main pros and cons to college students using Wikipedia as a source of information in their research and assignments, though anyone can consider these tips when using Wikipedia.

Wikipedias strengths

1. Basic information on virtually any topic

In addition to being free and readily available, Wikipedias standardizedarticle layoutand hyperlinks to other articles enable readers to quickly track down the basics on their topic the who, what, when, where and why.

In our experience, many students come to the library with a chosen topic for example, voting rights during Reconstruction but little knowledge about it. Before searching for the scholarly articles and books typically needed to complete their assignment, students benefit from knowing keywords and concepts related to their topic. This ensures they can try a variety of words and phrases in the catalog and databases as part of their search strategy.

2. Notes and references encourage readers to go deeper

TheWiki rabbit holeis a real browsing behavior of endlessly hopping from topic to topic, which is a testament to the sites easy navigation. Students can find valuable information such as important scholars on the topic by scrolling to the Notes and References sections of the Wikipedia page. Here they can find out who authored the various sources used in the article, as well as the citation information needed to locate additional books and articles.

3. Students can be editors

Students can write content, share information and properly cite scholarly sources on Wikipedia by becoming an editor. Quick-acting editors can become the first to add changes to an articleas events unfold. Those of us with access to scholarly sources, both in print and online through libraries,can expand Wikipedias contentby sharing information that might otherwise be behind a paywall.

Wikipedia edit-a-thonsare events at which people gather to edit articles on topics of interest or that might otherwise be ignored. American universities have hosted edit-a-thons onBlack artists,womens historyanddiverse artists in Appalachia.

Someprofessors assign Wikipedia editingas an alternative to the traditional research paper. This practice engages students in digital literacy and teaches themhow societal knowledge is constructed and shared.

Wikipedias drawbacks

1. Systemic and gender bias

The crowdsourced nature of Wikipedia can lead to the exclusion of some voices and topics. Although anyone can edit, not everyone does.

On the issue ofgender bias, Wikipedia acknowledges that most contributors are male, few biographies are about women, and topics of interest to women receive less coverage. This dynamic can be observed in other areas of underrepresentation, especially race and ethnicity. Nearly90% of U.S. Wikipedia editors identify as white, which leads to missing topics, perspectives and sources.

2. Citation requirements can exclude important sources

Wikipedia requires that information included in an article waspublished by a reliable source. While this is often an important element to confirm something is true or correct, it can be limiting for topics that have not received coverage in newspapers or scholarly journals. For some topics, such as Indigenous peoples of Canada, anoral historymay be an important source, but it could not be cited in a Wikipedia article.

3. Not all cited sources are open-access

Some sources may be behind paywalls, and since citationsdrive traffic and revenue, academic publishers have a vested interest in their publications being cited, whether or not they are freely available. However, college students can use their schools library to get full text access to the sources they discover in Wikipedia articles.

4. Articles change frequently

While timely updates are an advantage of Wikipedia, the impermanence of articles can make them difficult to rely on for information. Students can keep track of the date they find a piece of information on Wikipedia as it might not be the same when they return. The Talk page of a Wikipedia entry provides a discussion of changes to the article, and theInternet Archive Wayback Machinecan be used to view previous versions.

See the original post here:
Is Wikipedia a good source? 2 college librarians explain when to use the online encyclopedia and when to avoid it - KRQE News 13

LOS ANGELES Following the meteoric rise of new streamer Logan Reynolds, better known by his Twitch username Mav3r1ckPlayz, Wikipedia editors added a blank controversy section to the gamers information page, just in case.

These things are just inevitable; might as well save some time now, said Wikipedia editor Bryan Jobs. He hasnt done anything at all wrong yet, but its only a matter of time. I know youre probably thinking but this streamer just plays Mario games with his friends, how could he possibly do something insanely problematic? Give it a week. You can only stay at the top for so long until you randomly start spiraling on camera about how the white race is under attack, or women shouldnt be allowed in politics, or whatever miscellaneous prejudice that hell save for when hes broadcasting in front of thousands of people. When that happens, Ill be there. Ready to update the Wiki.

The streamer claimed he understood why the foreboding dropdown menu was necessary.

I havent done anything wrong yet, but I think its best for the sake of Wikipedia to just have the gun locked and loaded for when I mean if I do, Reynolds said on a livestream Tuesday. I want all my fans to be up to date the moment I go on a Twitter tirade about some oppressed minority that did nothing to provoke me, so its smart to have Wikipedia be proactive instead of reactive.

Fellow streamers hoped that Reynolds would keep them in the loop of his upcoming scandals as well.

In the Twitch community, its common courtesy to give your constituents a couple days notice before your controversies leak so we can get our reaction videos ready, said Twitch partner Eric Steadly. When I knew my grooming allegations were going to come to light, I gave a bunch of my friends a 24 hour heads up so that they could start photoshopping their thumbnails and preparing their Notes App statements for social media. Its just a simple modicum of respect among horrible, controversial people.

At press time, sources reported that Wikipedia had been ominously updated to include a sex scandal from December 2024 that had not even occurred yet.

Go here to see the original:
New Streamer's Wikipedia Page Has Empty Controversy Section Just In Case - Hard Drive