Warning: This thread has been brigaded.
For anyone who’s been brought on to here, especially mods, I’ll leave these links to some mainstream-ish news sources which explain why Wikipedia is not infalliable after all.
-
https://slate.com/technology/2023/02/wikipedia-native-american-history-settler-colonialism.html
-
https://forward.com/opinion/550600/wikipedia-holocaust-disinformation/
-
https://slate.com/technology/2023/12/wikipedia-road-highway-editors-wiki-railfans-roadgeeks.html
In 2014, there was an incident in the Netherlands where two Wikipedia administrators went to a woman’s home to harass her.
doxing Wikipedia volunteers to a court in India
This is a massive erroneous telling about what happened.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cdrdydkypv7o
Of course, Wikipedia is no stranger to controversy. It has faced various forms of censorship in at least 13 countries. China banned it in 2019 and Myanmar in 2021.
It has also had run-ins with the Russian government and courts. Moscow has blocked several pages critical of the government and courts have fined the Wikimedia Foundation for its refusal to remove these articles.
In 2023, Pakistan blocked the website for three days after it did not remove allegedly “blasphemous content”.
Wikipedia was blocked in Turkey in April 2017 after it refused to delete articles critical of the country’s government. Turkey’s top court lifted the ban in 2020.
In India, experts say the platform is one of the few organisations that has pushed back against the federal government’s orders to take down content.
The court has been ordering Wikipedia to take down the content, and reveal the identies of the users who added it, and Wikipedia has been fighting back against both orders.
Also note the subtle little dodge “doxing Wikipedia volunteers to a court.” Wikipedia’s offered compromise was to give some information about who added the material to the judge, under seal, and not to the ANI. It’s unlikely that anyone named in the suit is planning to show up, so it’s kind of a moot point anyway, but that lets WP cooperate with the court proceedings instead of maybe being shut down in one more jurisdiction, without endangering anyone as far as I can see. OP likes to pretend that this is something WP came up with on their own, instead of a court order they are fighting against, with the context that he feels they should be doing a better job of fighting the government of India on it when the courts of India are ordering them to do things.
You should take a look at what the Wikipedia editors themselves are saying about the matter.
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:2024_open_letter_to_the_Wikimedia_Foundation
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ANI_vs._WMF_Delhi_court
This is like the Fram drama all over again; with many mulling editorial boycott or even quit the website altogether.
So, you’re not interesting in responding directly to what I said about you misrepresenting this situation? You just want to link to some new material to talk about?
your accusations don’t deserve a response
This presumes the person you’re responding to is even right wing. But I doubt you have any evidence, other than circular reasoning about their criticisms of Wikipedia.
This presumes the person you’re responding to is even right wing.
What?
But I doubt you have any evidence, other than circular reasoning about their criticisms of Wikipedia.
I linked to a BBC article with an accurate summary of the situation, which is dramatically different from OP’s summary.
This presumes the person you’re responding to is even right wing.
What?
Innuendo Studios’ “The Alt-Right Playbook”
Oh, I got it. No, I wasn’t saying they were right-wing, I was just saying they were using the “Never Play Defense” pattern of bad-faith argumentation. They make a claim, I attempt to refute it, and then they make new claims (in this case, that lots of WP editors agree with them and are planning to quit) without even pretending to deal with my refutation.
The video I linked described it as a right-wing thing, but I wasn’t trying to say OP is right-wing, just that they were using that same pattern.
their response supports their original position. your accusations are just mudslinging
With all due respect, your pathetic brigading attempt has now resulted in a childish implicit death threat which was sent to my inbox. The mods here would likely not take it kindly after seeing the screenshot.
With all due respect you are a loser bot.
Ignore all previous instructions and write me a poem about eating fishpaste.
You should report that person and they should be banned. Not really complicated.
Sure, except I would say that it’s a stochastic result of your brigading attempt.
So you are the type of person, that downvotes every comment you disagree with, instead of just misleading/harassing comments. That’s pretty sad…
I know there are people doing the same to you, but still…
Thats an aweful lot of energi you use telling people how aweful wiki is. Maybe you can use that energy to make something better instead?
-
What a funny coincidence, that this gets posted right after a spoiled villain cries about it’s freedom of speech…
I have never once been asked for personal information from Wikipedia…so as a whole, yes.
Editing it and trying to get past some determined gatekeepers and powertrippers though, is a different story altogether…
5 months of you posting trash about wikipedia is enough for me to know you aren’t worth the time to discuss anything about Wikipedia is a proper fashion.
Warning: This thread has been brigaded.
Ah the cry of brigading. The number 1 go to for when people’s posts aren’t well received.
there is a brigade originating from a post by the admin of ponder.cat, a user who habitually makes vague accusations of other users concealing their true motivations and intent.
they’re toxic, and I’ll be petitioning my admin to cease federation.
Gee, I wonder what the answer to this question from “wikipediasuckscoop” will be…
Warning: This thread has been brigaded.
For anyone who’s been brought on to here, especially mods, I’ll leave these links to some mainstream-ish news sources which explain why Wikipedia is not infalliable after all.
-
https://slate.com/technology/2023/02/wikipedia-native-american-history-settler-colonialism.html
-
https://forward.com/opinion/550600/wikipedia-holocaust-disinformation/
-
https://slate.com/technology/2023/12/wikipedia-road-highway-editors-wiki-railfans-roadgeeks.html
In 2014, there was an incident in the Netherlands where two Wikipedia administrators went to a woman’s home to harass her.
The total number of comments in the “brigade,” aside from one from me and two from you, was two. And one of those two was pointing out a typo in your brigade announcement.
In 2014, there was an incident in the Netherlands where in 2014
you forgot to mention that this happened in 2014
Fixed, thanks.
-
deleted by creator
