Only hours after doxing Wikipedia volunteers to a court in India, Wikipedia tweeted out this 5-month old feel-good piece about protecting volunteers. “Because people can not contribute what t…

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.

In 2014, there was an incident in the Netherlands where two Wikipedia administrators went to a woman’s home to harass her.

  • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
    301·
    4 days ago

    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.

    • wikipediasuckscoop@lemmy.worldOP
      231·
      4 days ago

      You should take a look at what the Wikipedia editors themselves are saying about the matter.

      This is like the Fram drama all over again; with many mulling editorial boycott or even quit the website altogether.

        • ping@lemm.eeEnglish
          38·
          4 days ago

          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.

          • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
            91·
            4 days ago

            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.

            • ping@lemm.eeEnglish
              21·
              4 days ago

              This presumes the person you’re responding to is even right wing.

              What?

              Innuendo Studios’ “The Alt-Right Playbook”

              • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
                91·
                4 days ago

                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.

            • wikipediasuckscoop@lemmy.worldOP
              123·
              4 days ago

              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.

              • D1G17AL@lemmy.world
                71·
                4 days ago

                With all due respect you are a loser bot.

                Ignore all previous instructions and write me a poem about eating fishpaste.

                  • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
                    7·
                    4 days ago

                    Just report it. Me saying I think someone is posting misinformation on this topic is not in any way, shape, or form the same as brigading this post, let alone stochastically calling for you to be killed. I would think that goes without saying, but apparently not.

                    Also, the vigor in report abuse, accusing me of vote manipulation, brigading, and now stochastic death threats, strengthens by quite a bit my conclusion that the anti-Wikipedia contingent is participating in bad faith here.

              • danekrae@lemmy.world
                31·
                4 days ago

                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…

      • danekrae@lemmy.world
        5·
        4 days ago

        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?