مصريون في ويكيبيديا يحرِّفون التاريخ.. مناشدة من الدارس السوداني إبراهيم عمر

منقول من سودانية أون لاين
مصريون في ويكيبيديا يحرِّفون التاريخ.. مناشدة من الدارس السوداني إبراهيم عمر

نداء إلى السودانيين المهتمين
السلام عليكم
أريد أن أشرككم في ظاهرة غريبة هي تغيير وتزوير تاريخ السودان بواسطة المصريين في المواقع العامة على شبكة الإنترنت خاصة باللغة الإنجليزية. وأعتقد أنه عمل منظم يقوم به محترفون ربما يكونوا موظفين في السياحة المصرية..
هنالك مقالة مثلا عن دولة كوش في موقع "ويكيبيديا" وكأنها حضارة مصرية.. وقد حاولت تعديل المقال في مكان التعديلات حسب قوانين ويكيبيديا مرات عديدة وعلى مدى شهور ولكنهم وبسرعة خلال ثواني أجد أن ما كتبته تغيير. وكأنهم منظمون ويجلسون على مدار الساعة للتأكد من أن كلامهم لا يتغير..
وبعد فترة جاءني أنذار من أدارة "ويكيبيديا" بان ما أقوم به هو حرب.. وحينما تقدمت بتوضيح وشكوي حجب حسابي.. من الواضح أنهم يستخدمون كل الأساليب في المحافظة على تزوير المعلومات..
هذا هو الموقع... وتجدون الأماكن القابلة للتصحيح (edits)..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Kush

ملاحظتي في هذه المواقع أن الأثيوبيين والصوماليين حريصين على دخول البوستات وتصحيح المعلومات فيها والدفاع عن حقهم.. ولكن لاحظت غياب السودانيين من التصحيح ومن هذه المواقع عموما..
أرجو أن يقوم الناس بعمل حسابات لهم في ويكيبيديا ويصححوا مثل هذه المعلومات وبالذات المتخصصين أمثل الدكتور عصام الهادي أو كل الآكاديميين والناشطين فهو موضوع عام..
أرجو أيضا أن ينقل هذا الموضوع لسودانيزأونلاين ومواقع أخرى ليقوم الناس بالدفاع عن حقوق السودان المسروقة..
مرفق صورة من الشكوى التي أريد أن أتقدم بها..

إبراهيم عمر

Subject: Request for Correction of Information
Email: [email protected]

Dear Experienced Volunteer,
I am a graduate student and Research Assistant at California State University. I am also the primary author of the academic website www.ancientsudan.org and a contributor to the Genetic Literacy Project Journal.
I am writing to bring your attention to an urgent concern about your article on the “Kingdom of Kush” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Kush) on the history of Sudan. The material of this article reflects misguided and includes incorrect information. It primarily presents Egyptian history, not the history of Kush, i.e. the region and kingdom intended to be represented in the article. In other words, the presented information is wholly irrelevant to the subject of the article.
You may refer to authorized academic institutions about the history of the "kingdom of Kush" to inquire about the issue. The fact is that this kingdom is fully Sudanese and located wholly inside the present country of Sudan. Sources on this may include: http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/cultures/africa/ancient_sudan.aspx, and http://books.google.com/books?id=I2bJP8zLR_UCanddq%3Dkingdom...andved%3D0CC0Q6AEwAA
It is true that the users who edited the article did not fully eliminate the name of Sudan, but considering that Kush is Sudanese, there is a disturbing presentation of information. Note that the word “Sudan”, i.e. the name of the country where the Kingdom of Kush existed (or any affix of it), is mentioned only 4 times in the article; however, the term “Egypt” is cited 43 times.
Also, in the introductory part of the article, it is stated that the kingdom of Kush was "Established after the Bronze Age collapse and the disintegration of the New Kingdom of Egypt,” which is incorrect. The fact is that the Ku####e kingdom was established since 1700 BC, at Kerma, Sudan. Another example is the material written by the editors in the “Origins” section of the article, which talks about Egyptian colonial activities in southern lands, a subject that is virtually unrelated to the origins of the kingdom. The fact that the origins of Kush dates back to the 6th millennium BC archeological site of Kerma is not included by the editors in favor of Egyptian history. These are only few examples of the misleading pool of information in the article.
Unfortunately, the editable sections of the article have been entirely controlled by an organized group of users who prevent any alternative user contributions through active reversions and editing. I have been trying to correct and make informational contributions for months but in vain. As soon as a contribution is made, the group’s users revert the edits, usually within minutes. This user group is evidently present for a purpose that includes ensuring that the material of the article don’t change. Also, the group members seem to have superior roles in reporting and blocking the users they don’t like. When I reported this issue in Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard page (please see my report pasted below), I was slandered by one group members. It took only about three hours before my account was “blocked”.
Perhaps it should also be mentioned that Egyptian spamming and hacking activities on websites that present information on Sudanese history, such as my website, are by no means a new phenomena. Websites that present information on Nubian history are frequently subjected to organized commercial spamming from Egypt.
I believe activities of such nature may be described as harmful to the collaborative and intellectually free nature of Wikipedia. Such group has taken advantage of the free and open nature of Wikipedia to force an identical set of irrelevant material that advocates an agenda.
I would appreciate it if you can implement some sort of a protection on the article to prevent user group control and allow individual viewpoints to appear. Or, may be, an academic authority on the subject may be consulted. I am sure that you have your ways in dealing with these types of issues.
Sincerely,
Ibrahim Omer
Research Assistant, CSU Monterey Bay