[02:09] <Scary_Guy> I mean yes, but double agents exist
[06:10] <greg-g> to get misinformation in wikipedia is actually especially difficult on popular topics due to the number of eyeballs (we still do have a ton of editors). For less popular ones, maybe. But especially popular and double so the contentious ones it's practically impossible and your time would be better spent just working on normal PR.
[08:17] <Scary_Guy> Difficult does not mean impossible though, and corporations/governments have deep enough pockets to try, even on the most petty things.
[12:51] <jrwren> wikipedia says vaxx is safe and doesn't give 5g. it cann't be trsuted /s
[13:43] <cmaloney> Just don't be a minor notable in a field and you'll be fine. ;)
[13:44] <cmaloney> or a major notable in a small field that doesn't have a cult following
[15:55] <greg-g> Scary_Guy: point being, it's waaaaaaaaaaaay easier to get CNN/Fox/whomever to write a story you want the way you want it instead of getting wikipedia editors to (allow a) change to your article :)
[16:18] <cmaloney> <3
[16:28] <greg-g> (not that the news media is the gauge of anti-misinformation effectiveness ;) )