Wikipedia: the free encyclopedia...!?

From the main page of Wikipedia:

«Wikipedia is a collaborative and free online encyclopedia. Available in more than 280 languages, Wikipedia deals with typical topics found in traditional encyclopedias as well as those found in almanacs, geographical dictionaries and specialist publications. Wikipedia can be freely edited: anyone can contribute to the existing entries or create new ones.»

This claim however is not true! Try to change the page on the Prof Luigi Di Bella (particularly dedicated Italian language!), and to include the link to the last recent publications (... and/or published works and/or bibliography - editor's note).^{(e.g: [1] [2] [3] [4])} They will be immediately deleted by the "Wikipedia administrators" (...on the pretext of... "They aren't peer-reviewed publications!" and/or "Di Bella is a member of Journal Neuroendocrinology Letters (NEL)" and/or "...works have been published in journals with low impact factor (IF)!" and so on! – editor's note).

Wasn't it supposed to be free? As soon as you do a search on "Luigi Di Bella," or "The Di Bella Method" it immediately appears a poster reporting an obviously false and defamatory inscription:

«The so-called Di Bella Method is an alternative therapy for the treatment of cancer, which has no scientific evidence about its foundations and its effectiveness.»

Oddly, Google also behaves in a similar way. It may be an “occult direction"?

But someone managed to insert an entire page on Wikipedia intentionally misleading the "MDB" and where, incidentally, you cannot even insert a link to the most recent scientific publications. It is immediately censored!

It may be a "Protected" page? Luckily, in a sub-page ("General disclaimer"), the owners of Wikipedia declare that they are NOT RESPONSIBLE for the validity of the content:

«Wikipedia CANNOT guarantee, in any way, the validity of information posted. This, of course, does not imply a lack of interesting or accurate information, but it is important to know that all of the Wikipedia content may be modified, altered or vandalized by anyone. This means that any data or information found in Wikipedia entries may not adequately show the true state of shared knowledge or the truth of the facts.»

To be fair to its users, however, wouldn't have been better to put this clarification on the front page ?  Well! Probably not, seeing that even in this case its contents are not entirely true...

Always Your

Giuseppe Di Bella

Transcripted by: Alina Mina Leonard

[ 1] The Di Bella Method (DBM) improved survival, objective response and performance status in a retrospective observational clinical study on 122 cases of breast cancer;

[ 2] The Di Bella Method (DBM) improved survival, objective response and performance status in a retrospective observational clinical study on 55 cases of Lymphomas;

[ 3] The Di Bella Method (DBM) improved survival, objective response and performance status in a retrospective observational clinical study on 23 tumours of the head and neck;

[ 4] Cyclophosphamide plus Somatostatin, Bromocriptin, Retinoids, Melatonin and ACTH in the Treatment of Low-grade Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphomas at Advanced Stage: Results of a Phase II Trial;