Why Wikipedia Can Be Challenging

For those unfamiliar with it, Wikipedia is an on-line encyclopedia that arrives at its breadth and depth by allowing users to create content for it. For example, if you are the world's foremost expert on the coelacanth, you can share your knowledge with the world. (For the record, I am the world's foremost expert on the coelacanth, by knowing that it is a fish.)

What this means too, of course, is that anyone can put any old information up that they want. And, often, particularly for local elected officials, the officials or their lackeys can have free reign. Take these choice excerpts:

• Chuck Reed: "Chuck Reed has gained many nicknames during his tenure in office including 'Mr. Integrity'..." Why does that not sound familiar? The page also does a remarkable job downplaying any criticism - like his $48,000 loan to himself from City funds.
• Dave Cortese: "Soon after his swearing-in Cortese began establishing himself as a leader on the council." Now that's good objectivity.
• Sam Liccardo: "Councilmember Liccardo has been on the for front for Immigrant Rights since elected onto the City Council in January of 2007." You can also volunteer to copyedit entries, although, apparently, no one does.
• Nora Campos: "Campos' former colleague Vice Mayor Cindy Chavez was widely viewed as a powerful pro-union elected official on the City Council. Upon Chavez leaving the office due to term limits, there was speculation that Campos would carry Chavez's mantle. However, on March 4, 2007 the San Jose Mercury News noted that,'...some privately question whether Campos has the political skills to emerge as a council powerhouse.'" A fair, balanced, unbiased assessment. Recommendation to Nora's office: you should clean this up a bit.

Madison's, Pete's and some of the others are actually pretty good - simple, to-the-point, and accurate. Hopefully, they've learned a lesson from this: you can put whatever baloney up that you want. Let's get to editing!