Does Wikipedia protect your privacy?
Does Wikipedia protect your privacy?
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.
-
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.
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?
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?
-
What a funny coincidence, that this gets posted right after a spoiled villain cries about it's freedom of speech...
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...
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.
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.
-
Warning: This thread has been brigaded.