Regardless of your standing with regards to the Israel-Palestine war, this is an unexpected development as now legacy networks are finally paying serious attention to criticisms of Wikipedia after years of neglect.
Any observers who’ve been following Wikipedia-related rabbit holes long enough would know that criticism of Wikipedia is for a long time dominated by the political fringes (i.e. far-right) and many Wikipedia critics normally gets ridiculed out of the room as they’re been characterized as “fascists” and “anti-knowledge”. Now it’s like a dream come true for those critics as they seemingly get vindicated on television networks.
Perfect sometimes is the enemy of good. At least the issues on Wikipedia are finally being taken seriously after years of neglect.
This is a false dichotomy pigeonholing fallacy. Many critics do support Wikipedia as a concept, however they are pissed off by how toxic editors have captured the levers of power on Wikipedia and corrupted it. It’s probably better for the knowledge market to consist of multiple platform instead of a single, suffocating monopoly, and there are already real efforts in addressing it, such as ibis.wiki.
Cory Doctorow’s thesis on enshittification fits right in this case.
You understand that your links are saying Wikipedia is going to easy on Israel for their genocide against the native inhabitants of that land…
Right?
Like, that is what you’re presenting as a long overdue thing…
Has that been the reason you hate Wikipedia this whole time, they’re too honest about genocide?
With all due respect, the pro-Palestinian side has been griping about Wikipedia as well. You’re clearly trying to pigeonhole people so that you can dismiss all the concerns that the so-called “magical platform” has a ton of issues after all.
You made a whole post celebrating media corporations owned by conservative billionaires supporting a genocide was not only a good, but novel thing…
What are people supposed to think?
Stop thinking about Wikipedia as a “magical platform” and start thinking it as just another institution which are prone to human errors. It’s because of Google that Wikipedia has become a suffocating monopoly which escaped consequences every time somebody wants to vibe check it, until now.
“suffocating monopoly” lol ok bootlicker. I’m take Wikipedia any day over your corporate propaganda garbage.
You would’ve said the same about Apple and so on if this was the late 2000s.
By the way, there should be a second Internet Archive because currently the original one is getting under siege from copyright lawsuits, and unlike the WMF they’re running on budget money. In contrast to Wikipedia, I found the people there are kind and nice.
Yeah, it’s incredibly important that resources like Wikipedia remain neutral. I’m glad more people are paying attention to this now.
That’s right. The other day I had shared a PDF document on this sub that is a court document, regarding serial harassment and stalking incidents done by some toxic editors against an academic on Hebrew Wikipedia. Unfortunately I had removed it with the help of a mod because the document, which is publicly hosted on Wikimedia Foundation’s governance website, contains unredacted personal information.
I’m sorry, but this is an extremely naive take with absolutely no nuance whatsoever.
You said no nuance? Now this is indeed no nuance as the so-called magical platform has hidden ableist biases against topics related to neurodivergent people as well.