Information is only as accurate as its source

 
admin's picture

Firstly, we strive to provide as much information as accurately as possible on this site. However, this does not mean the information is extremely accurate. A number of factors does not allow for this;

The information supplied on this site are sourced from not only books, printed materials, brochures, news archive and historical documents, but also from interviews with people who were actually there.

As one would imagine, the source from books and other archive does not guarantee accuracy; I have personally seen information in official books that are not only completely wrong, but outright ridiculous on a subject matter that I know for a fact and personally experienced myself. One could imagine this is for several reasons; for simplicity's sake, a version of history, for example, is chosen to align itself to best suit a party's own agenda, or simply to have one official version to lay out for the public. Or simply that there was no one to fact check with, or, just plain laziness. The most accurate form would be photographic, video, and relevant official documents or photos from that point of time.

One such example would be the story of how the name Canada Hill came to be; there were so many versions, from older oil & gas employees, to official city council booklets to general populace living there, and all the versions were so similar that I had to include all of them in. Obviously they chose one for the official version to be used by the city, but the fact is, as they say in social media statuses "It's complicated".

Another such example would be Lutong Airfield/Airstrip/Airport. Plenty of people passing off Old Miri Airport as Lutong Airport, with this misinformation even making it into newspapers.

Or how online searches will give you the results that the First Oil Well is a replica (wrong!). Or that the name is "Grand Old Lady No.1", or "Grand Oil Well" (wrong again! - it's either Grand Old Lady which is a nickname, or Oil Well No.1, which is its official name).

Memories are not a reliable source either; we have to understand that people recall versions of the same event differently, so we have to account for that. There are quite a number of people on social media relating some event or some historical recollection (without video evidence, usually) that either simply did not happen or may be completely wrong. Usually, it's not that they lied - rather it's how they perceived it. Fortunately, there are also people who would come together and nudge that mis-recollection into a more accurate description, and there may be people who'd disagree to the misinformation and provide more details about a more accurate form to be pieced together as a whole. (Usually the original posters would respond with something like "Oh yeah, right! I mis-remembered this one event with another" or some similar response, thus proving that just memories are not reliable as people would think. While the combination of recollections from different people gives a more accurate representation, then again, this is no guarantee of 100% accuracy as there is always a risk that certain groups could always misinform in numbers - again - to fit their own agendas, or they have some sort of confirmation bias in groups that they did not realize.

Even newspapers archives aren't representative of accuracy - I have read enough newspapers back in the day to know for a fact that there are plenty of reports that got it wrong - either deliberately or due to the reporter's misperception of events, or simply an editing mistake (swapping of names is one example).

Off of the top of my head, there was an article about 'beads', but the headline read "deads" instead - plenty of such shenanigans in our local newspapers.

So, here goes:
All information in this site is provided "as is", with no guarantee of completeness, accuracy, timeliness or of the results obtained from the use of this information, and without warranty of any kind, express or implied, including, but not limited to warranties of performance, merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose.

You've been warned.

 Discuss & Review