UBF: Wikipedia article

Earlier I blogged about how the official UBF Internet Committee tries to remove critical material about UBF from the internet. Sometimes UBF members also, unofficially, try to remove material that is critical as well.

In March, 2012, someone using the name “Inesuh1012” attempted to completely blank out the critical section of the Wikipedia article entry for UBF. I know UBF leaders sometimes do this because I did this same thing to the original Wikipedia article when I was defending UBF! When I mangled the Wikipedia article about UBF, it was officially sanctioned by a few top leaders in UBF, who sometimes fed me material to post.

The reasons given for their actions, by “Inesuh1012”, are telling. Such actions speak louder than any “good words” or “blessings” UBF people speak about.

Here is the article history:

The “Inesuh1012” login has since been deleted. The IP geolocation of this person’s location shows them to be from St.Louis, Missouri.

Here is the ludicrous reason given by “Inesuh1012” for his/her actions:

“made it more unbiased”

So…by completely removing all critical content… removing many facts about an organization (such as being listed on 6 cult-watching groups) and only showing positive elements of something… that is what makes the article less biased?  This kind of action, in a nutshell, is a prime example of the UBF teachings at work.

Thankfully, two Wikipedians (who have nothing to do with UBF and only try to enforce the Wiki rules) have stepped in and locked the article to prevent such “edit warring”.


5 thoughts on “UBF: Wikipedia article

  1. And here are some more odd comments from Inesuh1012:

    “Nomoskedasticity, I made changes to the page of University Bible Fellowship because there were many unbiased facts about it. I wanted to improve the page, for University Bible Fellowship has changed throughout the years. The Controversy content was intolerant and prejudiced. I do not think that removing the Controversy content is considered vandalism; I was trying to improve the encyclopedia with a good-faith effort. I hope you understand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Inesuh1012 (talk • contribs) 05:02, 25 March 2012 (UTC)”


    So…there were “many unbiased facts”. If the facts were unbiased, why remove them? Removing biased opinions, now that would improve the article. But how would removing unbiased facts improve anything? Oh, that would improve UBF’s image… got it.

    “intolerant and prejudiced”? But Inesuh1012’s actions are so tolerant of unbiased facts and not prejudiced about UBF at all..

    And UBF has changed? Well come visit me and I’ll explain how much “change” has occurred the past 50 years…

  2. I have discovered the likely person who changed this. Her name is Ine Suh. She was 15 at the time of the edit. I suspect this at worst makes her misguided and at best good intentioned.

  3. That’s interesting info Forests, and good to know.

    What do you think about Sarah Barry and other Chicago leaders working with me to remove all negative aspects of the original Wikipedia article? We were all adults at that time.

  4. I find it unsurprising. UBF seems as a group to be optimistic, as Chesterton says- this means they want to white wash the world.

  5. This does not excuse them, it merely explains the behavior. I think that it is important that people are not deceived. Were it not for that wikipedia article I would have known nothing of the marriage by faith process, nothing about how their missionary practice plays out, nothing of their Confusionistic tendencies.