I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad linking to
wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We used to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more honest than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability and oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else uncomfortabe with this? -- Anthony Cole _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> |
Link to a screen-shot of the ad: https://instagram.com/p/Bhl01fhhXHT/
On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 at 8:53 pm, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote: > I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad linking to > wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We used > to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more honest > than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability and > oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion > about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else > uncomfortabe with this? > -- > Anthony Cole > > -- _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> |
In reply to this post by Anthony Cole
Considering the barriers to entry, growing thicket of policies,
organized group harassment, and open hostility on the English Wikipedia, I'm not sure we can even call it "the encyclopedia anyone can edit" anymore. So I'd say fact-checked is a more accurate and relevant claim these days. On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 8:53 AM, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote: > I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad linking to > wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We used > to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more honest > than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability and > oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion > about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else > uncomfortabe with this? > -- > Anthony Cole > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [hidden email] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> |
Not just English Wikipedia. All of the projects are hostile to "outsiders" Those not in English might even be worse for several reasons
Enviado desde mi LG de Telcel ------ Original message------ From: Robert Fernandez Date: Sun, Apr 15, 2018 9:17 AM To: Wikimedia Mailing List; Cc: Subject:Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia Considering the barriers to entry, growing thicket of policies, organized group harassment, and open hostility on the English Wikipedia, I'm not sure we can even call it "the encyclopedia anyone can edit" anymore. So I'd say fact-checked is a more accurate and relevant claim these days. On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 8:53 AM, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote: > I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad linking to > wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We used > to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more honest > than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability and > oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion > about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else > uncomfortabe with this? > -- > Anthony Cole > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [hidden email] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> |
Leigh, I disagree that all projects are hostile to outsiders. When someone
edit in a language they do not speak and use machine to translate contents for example and refused to stop after multiple warnings, a block in such case may not be considered an "hostile" response. That being said, I completely agree with Rob that fact-checked encyclopedia is more appropriate considering the hostility in some language Wikipedia, notably the English Wikipedia. How do you describe a Wikipedia where someone create their first article and got deleted and when the page creator approached the deleting admin on why their article got deleted and the response they received is "Kindly have the decency to create a decent article ", "count yourself lucky, I don't talk to IP address "? Regards, Isaac. On Apr 15, 2018 3:21 PM, "Leigh Thelmadatter" <[hidden email]> wrote: > Not just English Wikipedia. All of the projects are hostile to "outsiders" > Those not in English might even be worse for several reasons > > Enviado desde mi LG de Telcel > > ------ Original message------ > From: Robert Fernandez > Date: Sun, Apr 15, 2018 9:17 AM > To: Wikimedia Mailing List; > Cc: > Subject:Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia > > Considering the barriers to entry, growing thicket of policies, > organized group harassment, and open hostility on the English > Wikipedia, I'm not sure we can even call it "the encyclopedia anyone > can edit" anymore. So I'd say fact-checked is a more accurate and > relevant claim these days. > > On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 8:53 AM, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote: > > I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad linking > to > > wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We > used > > to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more honest > > than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability and > > oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion > > about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else > > uncomfortabe with this? > > -- > > Anthony Cole > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: [hidden email] > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [hidden email] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [hidden email] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> |
In reply to this post by Leigh Thelmadatter
Indeed. It's a very noticeable problem at the Wikipedia in Portuguese.
During a workshop with librarians from the National Library last month, I was kind of shocked by the huge amount of semi-automated warnings they were receiving, some of them completely useless, as they were directed to code-editing rather than the Visual Editor they were using. The librarians were also puzzled by the apparently pointless aggressivity and hostility coming from the environment they were trying to join. On the other hand, content is now much more reliable than it used to be - there is even a movement at our local wikipedia which is working to completely eradicate unsourced articles from there. Even more, we kind of justify that hostility against newbies with the notion that the project is being actively protected and surveilled against vandalism and fake claims. So yes, I concur that "fact-checked encyclopedia" is more appropriated today than "the encyclopedia anyone can edit" - at pt.wiki as well. Paulo 2018-04-15 15:21 GMT+01:00 Leigh Thelmadatter <[hidden email]>: > Not just English Wikipedia. All of the projects are hostile to "outsiders" > Those not in English might even be worse for several reasons > > Enviado desde mi LG de Telcel > > ------ Original message------ > From: Robert Fernandez > Date: Sun, Apr 15, 2018 9:17 AM > To: Wikimedia Mailing List; > Cc: > Subject:Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia > > Considering the barriers to entry, growing thicket of policies, > organized group harassment, and open hostility on the English > Wikipedia, I'm not sure we can even call it "the encyclopedia anyone > can edit" anymore. So I'd say fact-checked is a more accurate and > relevant claim these days. > > On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 8:53 AM, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote: > > I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad linking > to > > wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We > used > > to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more honest > > than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability and > > oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion > > about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else > > uncomfortabe with this? > > -- > > Anthony Cole > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: [hidden email] > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [hidden email] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [hidden email] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> |
In reply to this post by Leigh Thelmadatter
To be clear, I’m not arguing we should resurrect “anyone can edit”. I’m
wondering if this new slogan doesn’t run the risk of misleading readers wrt Wikipedia’s reliability. On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 at 10:21 pm, Leigh Thelmadatter <[hidden email]> wrote: > Not just English Wikipedia. All of the projects are hostile to "outsiders" > Those not in English might even be worse for several reasons > > Enviado desde mi LG de Telcel > > ------ Original message------ > From: Robert Fernandez > Date: Sun, Apr 15, 2018 9:17 AM > To: Wikimedia Mailing List; > Cc: > Subject:Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia > > Considering the barriers to entry, growing thicket of policies, > organized group harassment, and open hostility on the English > Wikipedia, I'm not sure we can even call it "the encyclopedia anyone > can edit" anymore. So I'd say fact-checked is a more accurate and > relevant claim these days. > > On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 8:53 AM, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote: > > I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad linking > to > > wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We > used > > to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more honest > > than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability and > > oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion > > about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else > > uncomfortabe with this? > > -- > > Anthony Cole > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: [hidden email] > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [hidden email] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [hidden email] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> -- Anthony Cole _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> |
In reply to this post by Leigh Thelmadatter
"🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥The encyclopedia of evil people, by evil people, for evil
people 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥" + a winking Baphomet as logo I find close to pointless derailing any discussion into a incircumstantial series of tirades. Vito 2018-04-15 16:21 GMT+02:00 Leigh Thelmadatter <[hidden email]>: > Not just English Wikipedia. All of the projects are hostile to "outsiders" > Those not in English might even be worse for several reasons > > Enviado desde mi LG de Telcel > > ------ Original message------ > From: Robert Fernandez > Date: Sun, Apr 15, 2018 9:17 AM > To: Wikimedia Mailing List; > Cc: > Subject:Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia > > Considering the barriers to entry, growing thicket of policies, > organized group harassment, and open hostility on the English > Wikipedia, I'm not sure we can even call it "the encyclopedia anyone > can edit" anymore. So I'd say fact-checked is a more accurate and > relevant claim these days. > > On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 8:53 AM, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote: > > I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad linking > to > > wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We > used > > to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more honest > > than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability and > > oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion > > about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else > > uncomfortabe with this? > > -- > > Anthony Cole > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: [hidden email] > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [hidden email] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [hidden email] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> |
In reply to this post by Anthony Cole
I'd just stick to "The Free Encyclopedia". It's a thing we can really agree
upon. (We can, right? Please tell me we can.) But I am curious - who made this ad? בתאריך יום א׳, 15 באפר׳ 2018, 15:54, מאת Anthony Cole <[hidden email] >: > I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad linking to > wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We used > to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more honest > than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability and > oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion > about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else > uncomfortabe with this? > -- > Anthony Cole > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [hidden email] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> |
If we want to do fact checking, which we do whether Congress has
decided publishers are responsible for the content of their publications or not, the way to automate it is shown at https://priyankamandikal.github.io/posts/gsoc-2016-project-overview/ Best regards, Jim On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 9:35 AM, Amir E. Aharoni <[hidden email]> wrote: > I'd just stick to "The Free Encyclopedia". It's a thing we can really agree > upon. (We can, right? Please tell me we can.) > > But I am curious - who made this ad? > > בתאריך יום א׳, 15 באפר׳ 2018, 15:54, מאת Anthony Cole <[hidden email] >>: > >> I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad linking to >> wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We used >> to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more honest >> than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability and >> oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion >> about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else >> uncomfortabe with this? >> -- >> Anthony Cole >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l >> New messages to: [hidden email] >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, >> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [hidden email] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> |
In reply to this post by Anthony Cole
That looks somewhat misleading. Who is making the claim?
Cheers, Peter -----Original Message----- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Anthony Cole Sent: 15 April 2018 14:56 To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia Link to a screen-shot of the ad: https://instagram.com/p/Bhl01fhhXHT/ On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 at 8:53 pm, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote: > I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad linking to > wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We used > to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more honest > than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability and > oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion > about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else > uncomfortabe with this? > -- > Anthony Cole > > -- _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> |
In reply to this post by Robert Fernandez
Anyone with internet can edit it, but not necessarily for long if they do it badly, and it is not easy to do it well.
Some of the facts are checked some of the time by some of the people, some of whom are competent to do so. "The fact-checked encyclopedia " is not entirely wrong. Misleading though. Cheers, Peter -----Original Message----- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Robert Fernandez Sent: 15 April 2018 16:16 To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia Considering the barriers to entry, growing thicket of policies, organized group harassment, and open hostility on the English Wikipedia, I'm not sure we can even call it "the encyclopedia anyone can edit" anymore. So I'd say fact-checked is a more accurate and relevant claim these days. On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 8:53 AM, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote: > I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad linking to > wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We used > to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more honest > than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability and > oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion > about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else > uncomfortabe with this? > -- > Anthony Cole > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [hidden email] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> |
In reply to this post by Anthony Cole
Both slogans/claims are not entirely wrong, but also both are highly misleading, and should not be used.
Cheers, Peter -----Original Message----- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Anthony Cole Sent: 15 April 2018 16:54 To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia To be clear, I’m not arguing we should resurrect “anyone can edit”. I’m wondering if this new slogan doesn’t run the risk of misleading readers wrt Wikipedia’s reliability. On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 at 10:21 pm, Leigh Thelmadatter <[hidden email]> wrote: > Not just English Wikipedia. All of the projects are hostile to "outsiders" > Those not in English might even be worse for several reasons > > Enviado desde mi LG de Telcel > > ------ Original message------ > From: Robert Fernandez > Date: Sun, Apr 15, 2018 9:17 AM > To: Wikimedia Mailing List; > Cc: > Subject:Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia > > Considering the barriers to entry, growing thicket of policies, > organized group harassment, and open hostility on the English > Wikipedia, I'm not sure we can even call it "the encyclopedia anyone > can edit" anymore. So I'd say fact-checked is a more accurate and > relevant claim these days. > > On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 8:53 AM, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote: > > I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad linking > to > > wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We > used > > to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more honest > > than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability and > > oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion > > about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else > > uncomfortabe with this? > > -- > > Anthony Cole > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: [hidden email] > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [hidden email] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [hidden email] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> -- Anthony Cole _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> |
In reply to this post by Amir E. Aharoni
Looks good to me.
Peter -----Original Message----- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Amir E. Aharoni Sent: 15 April 2018 17:35 To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia I'd just stick to "The Free Encyclopedia". It's a thing we can really agree upon. (We can, right? Please tell me we can.) But I am curious - who made this ad? בתאריך יום א׳, 15 באפר׳ 2018, 15:54, מאת Anthony Cole <[hidden email] >: > I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad linking to > wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We used > to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more honest > than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability and > oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion > about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else > uncomfortabe with this? > -- > Anthony Cole > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [hidden email] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> |
In reply to this post by James Salsman-2
I would like to try that but could not work out what to do from the link
Cheers, Peter -----Original Message----- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of James Salsman Sent: 15 April 2018 18:11 To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia If we want to do fact checking, which we do whether Congress has decided publishers are responsible for the content of their publications or not, the way to automate it is shown at https://priyankamandikal.github.io/posts/gsoc-2016-project-overview/ Best regards, Jim On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 9:35 AM, Amir E. Aharoni <[hidden email]> wrote: > I'd just stick to "The Free Encyclopedia". It's a thing we can really agree > upon. (We can, right? Please tell me we can.) > > But I am curious - who made this ad? > > בתאריך יום א׳, 15 באפר׳ 2018, 15:54, מאת Anthony Cole <[hidden email] >>: > >> I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad linking to >> wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We used >> to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more honest >> than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability and >> oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion >> about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else >> uncomfortabe with this? >> -- >> Anthony Cole >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l >> New messages to: [hidden email] >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, >> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [hidden email] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> |
I just tried googling Wikipedia and am not seeing that result at all. I see
" *Wikipedia* is a free online encyclopedia, created and edited by volunteers around the world and hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation." When I do the same search on mobile, I see the same thing, except this time it is accompanied by the Dutch version, which I personally find very cute, and very Dutch. Consider it the "Eeyore version of explaining free knowlege". On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 6:42 PM, Peter Southwood < [hidden email]> wrote: > I would like to try that but could not work out what to do from the link > Cheers, > Peter > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On > Behalf Of James Salsman > Sent: 15 April 2018 18:11 > To: Wikimedia Mailing List > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia > > If we want to do fact checking, which we do whether Congress has > decided publishers are responsible for the content of their > publications or not, the way to automate it is shown at > https://priyankamandikal.github.io/posts/gsoc-2016-project-overview/ > > Best regards, > Jim > > On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 9:35 AM, Amir E. Aharoni > <[hidden email]> wrote: > > I'd just stick to "The Free Encyclopedia". It's a thing we can really > agree > > upon. (We can, right? Please tell me we can.) > > > > But I am curious - who made this ad? > > > > בתאריך יום א׳, 15 באפר׳ 2018, 15:54, מאת Anthony Cole < > [hidden email] > >>: > > > >> I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad linking > to > >> wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We > used > >> to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more > honest > >> than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability > and > >> oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion > >> about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else > >> uncomfortabe with this? > >> -- > >> Anthony Cole > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > >> New messages to: [hidden email] > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > >> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: [hidden email] > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [hidden email] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. > http://www.avg.com > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [hidden email] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> |
There will always be a use for a fact-checked online encyclopedia.
https://everything2.com/title/The+Everything+credibility+problem On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 12:47 PM, Jane Darnell <[hidden email]> wrote: > I just tried googling Wikipedia and am not seeing that result at all. I see > " *Wikipedia* is a free online encyclopedia, created and edited by > volunteers around the world and hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation." > > When I do the same search on mobile, I see the same thing, except this time > it is accompanied by the Dutch version, which I personally find very cute, > and very Dutch. Consider it the "Eeyore version of explaining free > knowlege". > > On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 6:42 PM, Peter Southwood < > [hidden email]> wrote: > > > I would like to try that but could not work out what to do from the link > > Cheers, > > Peter > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On > > Behalf Of James Salsman > > Sent: 15 April 2018 18:11 > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia > > > > If we want to do fact checking, which we do whether Congress has > > decided publishers are responsible for the content of their > > publications or not, the way to automate it is shown at > > https://priyankamandikal.github.io/posts/gsoc-2016-project-overview/ > > > > Best regards, > > Jim > > > > On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 9:35 AM, Amir E. Aharoni > > <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > I'd just stick to "The Free Encyclopedia". It's a thing we can really > > agree > > > upon. (We can, right? Please tell me we can.) > > > > > > But I am curious - who made this ad? > > > > > > בתאריך יום א׳, 15 באפר׳ 2018, 15:54, מאת Anthony Cole < > > [hidden email] > > >>: > > > > > >> I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad > linking > > to > > >> wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We > > used > > >> to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more > > honest > > >> than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability > > and > > >> oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the > discussion > > >> about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else > > >> uncomfortabe with this? > > >> -- > > >> Anthony Cole > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > > >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > > >> New messages to: [hidden email] > > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > , > > >> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > > New messages to: [hidden email] > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: [hidden email] > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > --- > > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. > > http://www.avg.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: [hidden email] > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [hidden email] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > -- Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266 _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> |
In reply to this post by Anthony Cole
Dear Anthony,
I share your concern that "fact checked" is over promising people in a dangerous and irresponsible way. "The encyclopaedia anyone can edit" is closer to the truth and the downside of getting it wrong is much less bad. "My unsourced edit was rejected" or "my new article on my client was deleted as spam" are easier complaints to deal with than "your fact checked encyclopaedia that I trusted included this howler that had sat there for over a year and relying on it has cost me x". In the last few days I spotted and reverted a blatant vandalism that had lasted for over two years, and when I'm patrolling for typos I'm not fact checking plausible but well written content in a subject I know nothing of. Most of the time I'm checking newish edits for typos I've patrolled before, so I'm only picking up ancient vandalism when I patrol a typo, grammatical mistake or risky word I haven't looked at before. Yet it isn't unusual for me to pick up blatant vandalism that has persisted for years. Things are I understand much better on DE where we have flagged revisions, but on English some edits are not even looked at by a single vandalfighter. Most of course are looked at and some are looked at by many many eyes. But the random nature of recent changes patrolling means that some edits are not patrolled by anyone. I don't know what proportion of the content is fact checked, but on English we can't even honestly claim that all newbie and IP edits are currently checked for vandalism on any meaningful timescale. At some point I may start an RFC to up our game on EN so that we can at least promise that "every edit has been screened for blatant vandalism", a less impressive promise than "the fact-checked encyclopedia" but one that I think we could and should move to. Draft at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:WereSpielChequers/Invisible_flagged_revisions WereSpielChequers > On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 8:53 AM, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad linking > > to > > > wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We > > used > > > to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more > honest > > > than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability > and > > > oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion > > > about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else > > > uncomfortabe with this? > > > -- > > > Anthony Cole > > > _______________________________________________ > > ******************************************** > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> |
In reply to this post by Vi to
> "🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥The encyclopedia of evil people, by evil people, for evil
people 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥" + a winking Baphomet as logo I think we should change this to our slogan just for April 1. On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 11:31 AM, Vi to <[hidden email]> wrote: > "🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥The encyclopedia of evil people, by evil people, for evil > people 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥" + a winking Baphomet as logo > > I find close to pointless derailing any discussion into a incircumstantial > series of tirades. > > Vito > > 2018-04-15 16:21 GMT+02:00 Leigh Thelmadatter <[hidden email]>: > >> Not just English Wikipedia. All of the projects are hostile to "outsiders" >> Those not in English might even be worse for several reasons >> >> Enviado desde mi LG de Telcel >> >> ------ Original message------ >> From: Robert Fernandez >> Date: Sun, Apr 15, 2018 9:17 AM >> To: Wikimedia Mailing List; >> Cc: >> Subject:Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia >> >> Considering the barriers to entry, growing thicket of policies, >> organized group harassment, and open hostility on the English >> Wikipedia, I'm not sure we can even call it "the encyclopedia anyone >> can edit" anymore. So I'd say fact-checked is a more accurate and >> relevant claim these days. >> >> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 8:53 AM, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> wrote: >> > I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad linking >> to >> > wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We >> used >> > to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more honest >> > than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability and >> > oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion >> > about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else >> > uncomfortabe with this? >> > -- >> > Anthony Cole >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ >> wiki/Wikimedia-l >> > New messages to: [hidden email] >> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, >> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ >> wiki/Wikimedia-l >> New messages to: [hidden email] >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, >> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ >> wiki/Wikimedia-l >> New messages to: [hidden email] >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, >> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> >> > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [hidden email] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> |
I just googled "wikipedia" again and that ad is still coming up. (I’m in
Australia.) When you click the link in the ad it takes you (via 3 or 4 redirects) to wikipedia.org with the word "paid" in the search field. [1] When you click the Google maps link below the ad text it, strangely, takes you to the location of a suburban Kmart store. I'm finding it harder to believe this is sanctioned by WMF. Anyway, I’d appreciate it if someone from the WMF could chime in on this. 1. https://instagram.com/p/BhpnGuehzhw/ On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 at 9:48 pm, Robert Fernandez <[hidden email]> wrote: > > "🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥The encyclopedia of evil people, by evil people, for evil > people 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥" + a winking Baphomet as logo > > I think we should change this to our slogan just for April 1. > > On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 11:31 AM, Vi to <[hidden email]> wrote: > > "🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥The encyclopedia of evil people, by evil people, for evil > > people 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥" + a winking Baphomet as logo > > > > I find close to pointless derailing any discussion into a > incircumstantial > > series of tirades. > > > > Vito > > > > 2018-04-15 16:21 GMT+02:00 Leigh Thelmadatter <[hidden email]>: > > > >> Not just English Wikipedia. All of the projects are hostile to > "outsiders" > >> Those not in English might even be worse for several reasons > >> > >> Enviado desde mi LG de Telcel > >> > >> ------ Original message------ > >> From: Robert Fernandez > >> Date: Sun, Apr 15, 2018 9:17 AM > >> To: Wikimedia Mailing List; > >> Cc: > >> Subject:Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia > >> > >> Considering the barriers to entry, growing thicket of policies, > >> organized group harassment, and open hostility on the English > >> Wikipedia, I'm not sure we can even call it "the encyclopedia anyone > >> can edit" anymore. So I'd say fact-checked is a more accurate and > >> relevant claim these days. > >> > >> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 8:53 AM, Anthony Cole <[hidden email]> > wrote: > >> > I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad > linking > >> to > >> > wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We > >> used > >> > to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more > honest > >> > than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability > and > >> > oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the > discussion > >> > about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else > >> > uncomfortabe with this? > >> > -- > >> > Anthony Cole > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > >> wiki/Wikimedia-l > >> > New messages to: [hidden email] > >> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > , > >> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > >> wiki/Wikimedia-l > >> New messages to: [hidden email] > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > >> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > >> wiki/Wikimedia-l > >> New messages to: [hidden email] > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > >> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: [hidden email] > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [hidden email] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> -- Anthony Cole _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [hidden email] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |