Is Wikipedia Reliable? – Questions For Corbett #056

by | Mar 16, 2020 | Questions For Corbett | 24 comments

This week on Questions For Corbett, Jon asks if Wikipedia is part of the problem. Long-time listeners will already know the answer is yes, and James goes through some of the reasons why we know this to be true. But as part of the open source data collection that The Corbett Report provides as a public service, James asks Corbett Report members to log in to and leave links to specific instances of Wikipedia being caught out.

Watch this video on BitChute / / YouTube or Download the mp4

Requiem for the Suicided: Terrance Yeakey

Corbett Report Radio 220 – The Bastion of Truthiness

Wikipedia: A Disinformation Operation?

CIA, FBI computers used for Wikipedia edits

The Philip Cross Affair

The “Philip Cross” MSM Promotion Operation Part 3

Ruling in German Wikipedia trial

Wikipedia Slashes Spanish Flu Death Rate


  1. Ozone Therapy – Wikipedia – March 15, 2020
    Ozone therapy is a pseudoscience treatment that increases the amount of oxygen in the body through the introduction of ozone. In April 2016, the FDA prohibited all medical uses of ozone, “In any medical condition for which there is no proof of safety and effectiveness”, stating “Ozone is a toxic gas with no known useful medical application in specific, adjunctive, or preventive therapy. In order for ozone to be effective as a germicide, it must be present in a concentration far greater than that which can be safely tolerated by man and animals.”[1] An overview of the history and practice of ozone therapy was published in the “Journal of Natural Science, Biology and Medicine” in 2011.[2]

    Ozone therapy is sold as an unproven alternative medicine for various illnesses. Beginning in 1991 the FDA has prosecuted and sent to jail several people presenting themselves as medical doctors and selling ozone therapy products as a medical cure or operating medical clinics using ozone therapy for healing human illness.[3][4] Arrests following similar activity have been made in other countries as well.[5][6] At least 10 deaths have been related to ozone therapy or its lack of usefulness, in nine cases there had been investigation and in eight it was discovered that the practitioners had used false credentials.[7]


    • (continuing)
      Ozone therapy consists of the introduction of ozone into the body via various methods, usually involving its mixture with various gases and liquids before injection, with potential routes including the vagina, rectum, intramuscular (in a muscle), subcutaneously (under the skin), or intravenously (directly into veins). Ozone can also be introduced via autohemotherapy, in which blood is drawn from the patient, exposed to ozone and re-injected into the patient.[8]

      This therapy has been proposed for use in various diseases, including cancer, AIDS, multiple sclerosis, arthritis, heart disease, Alzheimer’s dementia, and Lyme disease, though supportive evidence for these applications is limited. Theories about the ability of ozone to kill tumor cells with oxygen have no credible scientific basis.[8] For treatment of HIV/AIDS, although ozone deactivates the viral particles outside the body, there is no evidence of benefit for living patients.[9]…

      …Much of the concern related to ozone therapy revolves around the safety of blood ozonation…
      …Serious complications reported from the use of this therapy include…
      … In April 2016, the FDA prohibited the medical use of ozone, “In any medical condition for which there is no proof of safety and effectiveness”, stating “Ozone is a toxic gas with no known useful medical application in specific, adjunctive, or preventive therapy. In order for ozone to be effective as a germicide, it must be present in a concentration far greater than that which can be safely tolerated by man and animals.”[1]

  2. So glad you brought both of these sources up thomas.j!

    I would like to add another Full Measure episode where she talks about the dark side of Wikipedia…

    Sharyl Atkisson expands not only on astroturfing but also the army of editors that continuously fight legitimate edits in favor of biased misinformation.

    I am also glad you brought up the phenomenon of ‘guerrilla skeptics’. These self-styled, inquisitory “skeptics” that Wikipedia hired (the kind of James Randi/Michael Shermer types) that will oppose anything or any edit that goes against their materialistic, orthodox paradigm – this especially is the case when it comes to phenomenon that are on the fringes of science…such as ESP, alternative medicine, and of course…conspiracy theories.

    The above site gives example after example on how these self-styled, dogmatic “skeptics” have various campaigns on Wikipedia to discredit alternative medicine as well as other phenomenon…often citing “debunking” claims from Skeptic organizations only and never any sources from legitimate researchers into these fields.

    Also, Jimmy Wales himself is anti-alternative medicine and dogmatically asserts it is all quackery….you can read about his attitude here:

    Anyway, thank you for bringing this up!

    And James, great post as always!

  3. Mt ex-wife, a school teacher for over 30 years would not let students use Wikipedia as a reference in any paper they had to do.

    Even when I was in college circa 2005-2008, Professors did not want us to use Wikipedia as a source.

    However, for my Biology and Chemistry classes, Wikipedia did come in handy for study.
    Textbooks often use terms (words) which create a fog about the content, because a person does not have a good grasp of the term. Many terms are defined with other terms.

    I would open my textbook, read until I ran across a term which I did not completely grasp. Then, I would go to Wikipedia for the term. Since the terms in Biology and Chemistry are often defined by other terms which I did not know, it made it easy to click the links to all the different terms, until I could grasp the entire concept.

  4. Under Emotional Freedom Technique …for years Wikipedia has said it has no use as a therapeutic tool and all its effects are placebo effect. When researchers submitted edits with peer reviewed blinded studies with both experimental and control groups in placebo controlled trials, the longest those edits ever lasted was 17 seconds. I got this from the researchers themselves. When Jimmy Wales was confronted on this obvious fraud via emails, mine included, he responded back that we are all frauds as the studies aren’t published in mainstream journals but are published in journals of energy psychology. The peer reviewed studies are published in recognized psychology journals as well as energy psychology journals. So he was lying to begin with and stating we are all frauds because energy psychology journals publish studies on energy psychology is imbecilic. That is like saying publishing scientific articles about a virus in Virology is fraudulent because it wasn’t published in JAMA. We are recognized as an effective treatment
    by the VA in the US, The Canadian Psychology Association, The Crime Victim Compensation Board in Canada, as well as a proper field of research in England. Bill Dovel RN, Pro EFT Master Practitioner

    • Across the internet, it seems “they” are strongly targeting alternative health practices.

      I remember years ago that Dr. Mercola talked about EFT.

  5. I remember, years ago, that the the NYC Police Department had a unit assigned to scrub the internet of embarrassing stories. It was in article covered just topic. They do good work since I wasn’t able to find it. The first seven search result pages contained positive articles about New York’s Finest.

  6. I found a short reference to Terrance Yeakey in Wikipedia here:

    However, this was not from the Wiki search but from a google search. Google titles this reference with “Oklahoma City bombing conspiracy theories”. Be careful. The Wikipedia reference contains a link that as of now is flagged with an expired security certificate. Needless to say, I did not visit the unsecure site.

  7. Markus Fiedler and Frank – Michael Speer have done a informative research documentary based on Dr. Daniele Gansers Wikipedia page. Following the question “why is he been called a conspiracy theorist and why won`t one be allowed to edit his wikipedia post” Sadly i only know of the german version.

    when reading up a german wikipedia post on “rituelle Gewalt” (= “satanic ritual abuse”) i noticed it was very one sided. Checking the “view history” (=Versionsgeschichte) section there was exactly the one editor named “Phi” (who is also named in the documentry above, working long shifts 7 days a week) also beeing very activ in this specific article. Also one is able to see that on January 6th at 13:09 editor “Doc Taxon” writes “Schütze (=protecting) rituelle Gewalt: edit- war”

    and the same was done by editor “Sargoth” on august 23rd 2013 at 19:31
    Only so called “Administrates” were able to edit the article then.

    • back when i was a member of survivorship, i heard tell about wikipedia censorship & blacklisting sites, shortly thereafter, Dr Ellen Lacter posted on her website: “Since February, 2008, on Wikipedia’s page on “Satanic Ritual Abuse,” Wikipedia’s staff has been suppressing and deleting credible posts from credible sources (including my posts- I am a licensed California psychologist) that have documented substantial criminal and psychological evidence of criminal ritual abuse, and instead has completely discounted the existence of ritual abuse. As of July 27, 2009, Wikipedia’s page on “Satanic ritual abuse” begins as follows: “Satanic ritual abuse (SRA, sometimes known as ritual abuse, ritualistic abuse, organised abuse, sadistic abuse and other variants) refers to a moral panic that originated in the United States in the 1980s, spreading throughout the country and eventually to many parts of the world, before subsiding in the late 1990s.”

      Wikipedia has now escalated its censorship of all information supporting the existence of ritual abuse by blacklisting four important websites about ritual abuse on July 18, 2009.”

      • Dear victoria

        Thank you for the link! This makes alot sense and confirms that information on this topic is being actively surpressed. Also the german version emphasises on “moral panic”and deleted many sources from editors from editors who stood no chance.

        Thank you so much for your response and helpful information.

        • tho im not in the least surprised, & while it saddens me to hear such censorship & suppression still happening… i appreciate your sharing & wonderful reply, Chapati.

          its altogether criminal, & here’s an article thats broader in scope, contains many links

          “Wikipedia has a long history of problems with accuracy, bias and allegations of connections to pedophilia and pornography.

          1) The Bomis Connection
          2) Pedophilia Allegations
          3) Wikipedia Accuracy Problems
          4) Summary of the problems with Wikipedia
          5) Bias in child abuse articles – banning websites with information on child abuse crimes”

          • Your response as well as the link are very much appreciated too.

            Thank you victoria

            I will prepare to dive down this rabbit hole and hope to be able to spread some awarness in the future in my little universe to this topic with these links to back it up.

  8. The statements of U.S. government agencies are essentially gospel on Wikipedia. That should tell you all you need to know.

    For example: A Wikipedia editor need not write something like “The CIA claims that Osama bin Laden was responsible for the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.”
    Instead the editor can simply write “Osama bin Laden was responsible for the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.” as if it’s an absolute fact, then they simply tack a little reference number on the end that links to a CIA statement (that virtually nobody will ever bother checking).

  9. By now most reading here know that anything open to informational abuse by the ‘authorities’ will be abused to the extent proven possible in supporting the use of authority by authority’s controllers. This goes for the mockingbird media of all stripes to schooling or anything that transfers information from one human point to another.

    That said a question for James. Edit this down as you wish.

    If as C. Quigley stated the financial elite have as their goal a NWO and ‘can dominate the political system of each nation and the world economy as a whole;’ how then do we explain the antagonism between a Venezuela under a Maduro govt. that has signed on to most NWO protocols (‘Hasta 2030’ for Venezuela) and a western international coalition lead by the ‘USA’ or its controllers that seeks to ‘modify’ the govt. of Venezuela to conform to the desired standards of this NWO? If the central banks of each nation march to the tune being played by the BIS et al (including corporate states such as Russia, Iran and China) is this a matter of the fact that some national elites for rather spurious reasons are not welcome in the ‘pyramid cap’s’ club? After all even personalities as obnoxious as the last half dozen or so US Presidents have been acceptable to the ‘cap.’Or are these antagonisms to do more with theater and on the world stage and keeping the people and their expectations within the normalcy bias or lower to that which they have always been in?

  10. Wiki must be taken with a huge grain of salt.
    Once you understand how they operate and who operates their repository,
    you can cherry pick what you wish to take seriously or not.

    I learned my lesson about how they operate when I tried to make edits to a sport statistic. This is not wishy-washy stuff, nor conspiracy theory fodder.
    It either happened or it didn’t and it was witnessed by millions of people.

    When I was told that edits needed to have references to published journals or
    mainstream media articles, I immediately understood how they play their game and didn’t bother wasting my time anymore trying to make any Wiki edits.

  11. I don’t know why anyone would have kids but if anyone’s going to do it, I’d certainly prefer it be people who think critically and have decent ethics like these guys.
    Major props for not allowing your kids to be injected with ‘vaccines’.
    Lucky kids

  12. The Wikipedia article on the “Sandy Hook Elementary School” incident of December 14, 2012 makes absolutely NO mention of the efforts of Mr. Wolfgang Halbig to obtain thousands of public documents via State and Federal FOIA requests. We all should question the morals and the ethics of Wikipedia.

Submit a Comment


Become a Corbett Report member