7 ms·

not a fan of China government but in this case I tend to believe them, I've seen Wikipedia volunteers spread actual disinformation in a concerted effort espec

not a fan of China government but in this case I tend to believe them, I've seen Wikipedia volunteers spread actual disinformation in a concerted effort especially on politically charged topics.

michaelsbradley 5y ago
downvoted for lack of evidence/examples.
- andyxor 5y ago
  well pick any American politician right of center and check their wikipedia page.
  - michaelsbradley 5y ago
    please give an example with quote/s, link/s, and your summary analysis.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - krageon 5y ago
    Every US politician that anyone would actually know is extreme right, so this is a very big group. Not a very useful classification, you may as well have said "any US politician". Then we get to the point where it is unclear what your actual problem is with their wikipedia pages. The only thing that can be concluded is that you apparently believe the wikipedia page of every US politician is somehow anomalous. It tells us nothing.
    - andyxor 5y ago
      I mean, most of Republicans on wikipedia are vilified as "far-right conspiracy theorists" and all shades of evil, with links to fake news as source of information (Washington Post for example) one can argue, that if MSM spreads disinfo what can you expect from wikipedians, but the problem is their "power editors" and admins are a small clique with very particular political bias, it's just another echo chamber
      - Omnitaus 5y ago
        Wikipedia absolutely has a conservative bent, I wouldn't call the editing body "liberal" for using a newspaper owned by a union-busting multibillionaire as a source You didn't really respond to the assertion that all American politicians are right-wing, but it's true. We have a "blood and soil" far right party and a "diverse corporate oligopoly" center-right party.
        AnimalMuppet 5y ago
        > You didn't really respond to the assertion that all American politicians are right-wing, but it's true. "Two people repeating it on HN comments" != "it's true". It really boils down to: What's your standard of reference? You seem to want to use Europe (I assume) as the standard for defining left and right in US politics. Why do you consider that a reasonable thing to do? And even if you consider it a reasonable thing, why Europe? Why not Asia? Or the Middle East? Or Africa? Or the world as a whole? Or why not, you know, use the US as the standard for judging what left and right are in US politics?
        krageon 5y ago
        Are you under the impression that if the hypothetical scope were moved off of Europe (why even assume it is on there?), US political parties would seem less unilaterally right-wing? I don't think you could make a coherent (and truthful) case for that, but I might be interested to read it.
        AnimalMuppet 5y ago
        Well, if you put the focus on the Middle East, I'm pretty sure every US party would be extremely left-wing. Now, I agree that the Middle East is not where the standard of reference should be, but it's the area that I'm pretty sure of how we compare. Others are more tricky. Central and South America? There are countries there that we are clearly to the right of, but also some that we align somewhat with. I don't recall whether there are currently any right-wing dictatorships there. Asia? We could be to the left of some countries there. I don't have a good idea of how to describe where China is right now - are they right or left? They kind of have elements of both. At least some parties in India are to the right of the US. I don't have a good feel for Africa, though I'd bet that in at least some countries, some parties are to the right of the US. So... it's complicated. I think I can make a... a "case" might be overstating it, but at least a handwaving argument that if you move the focus off of Europe, then US political parties are less clearly right-wing. But an actual case? That would take something like a worldwide ranking of political parties on a left-right axis, which is data that I freely admit that I do not have.
- x0x0 5y ago
  Nazis: https://www.wired.com/story/one-womans-mission-to-rewrite-nazi-history-wikipedia/ https://www.wired.com/story/one-womans-mission-to-rewrite-na... Then there's this: > Most of Scottish Wikipedia Written By American in Mangled English https://www.vice.com/en/article/wxqy8x/most-of-scottish-wikipedia-written-by-american-in-mangled-english https://www.vice.com/en/article/wxqy8x/most-of-scottish-wiki... Some examples of the writing here: https://twitter.com/NeerajKA/status/1298579510581960705 https://twitter.com/NeerajKA/status/1298579510581960705 And finally, I remember some translated wikipedia language was mostly written by like 10 people and went kind of nuts, but I can't find a link. This stuff is like @tptacek bait -- I heard of these by reading his twitter.
  - nextaccountic 5y ago
    Those two are examples of lone individuals spreading misinformation, but not a concerted effort of Wikimedia itself or one of its chapters
    - x0x0 5y ago
      Using wikipedia. Wikipedia can't disclaim the information on wikipedia.org if they want to be a credible organization.
    - lelandfe 5y ago
      And the first example isn’t even that - it’s an editor who is trying to reduce the usage of sources that stem from Nazi propaganda and to limit flowery unsourced language around the Nazis. Other editors get in her way, but that’s still in good faith. Not exactly a situation that backs up that commenter’s point, for sure.
  - dredmorbius 5y ago
    The first is not an example of misinformation at all. The second isn't politically motivated, but simple vandalism.
    - x0x0 5y ago
KerrickStaley 5y ago
That's not what's happening here though. China has for years put enormous effort into promoting its worldview on the China/Taiwan issue in every way it can, even though that worldview contradicts the facts on the ground. Taiwan is de-facto an independent country with its own government and military sovereignty, and the majority of citizens of Taiwan are happy with that arrangement. China saying that Wikipedia Taiwan is spreading misinformation is just an effort to warp reality to fit China's alternate-universe version of the facts.
- plantain00 5y ago
  Taiwan's official name is Republic of China(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan), it's not China/Taiwan issue, it's China Civil War. Just like Democratic People's Republic of Korea and Republic of Korea(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korea), the two China and the two Korea will unify finally.
- CogitoCogito 5y ago
  Taiwan (i.e. the ROC) is not a "de-facto" country, it _is_ a country. I don't get the feeling you're anti-Taiwan, but I think calling Taiwan a "de-facto" implicitly questions its status and should be avoided.
  - anakaine 5y ago
    I'm reasonably certain the "de-facto" wording is used as Taiwan isn't actually recognised formally and fully as an independent country internationally. Thats not to say it shouldn't be, but it acknowledges the current truth.
    - thefringthing 5y ago
      They don't even officially acknowledge themselves to be an independent country; they claim all of China as their territory, not just Taiwan.
      - 5y ago

not a fan of China government but in this case I tend to believe them, I've seen Wikipedia volunteers spread actual disinformation in a concerted effort especially on politically charged topics.

michaelsbradley 5y ago

downvoted for lack of evidence/examples.

andyxor 5y ago
well pick any American politician right of center and check their wikipedia page.
- michaelsbradley 5y ago
  please give an example with quote/s, link/s, and your summary analysis.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- krageon 5y ago
  Every US politician that anyone would actually know is extreme right, so this is a very big group. Not a very useful classification, you may as well have said "any US politician". Then we get to the point where it is unclear what your actual problem is with their wikipedia pages. The only thing that can be concluded is that you apparently believe the wikipedia page of every US politician is somehow anomalous. It tells us nothing.
  - andyxor 5y ago
    I mean, most of Republicans on wikipedia are vilified as "far-right conspiracy theorists" and all shades of evil, with links to fake news as source of information (Washington Post for example) one can argue, that if MSM spreads disinfo what can you expect from wikipedians, but the problem is their "power editors" and admins are a small clique with very particular political bias, it's just another echo chamber
    - Omnitaus 5y ago
      Wikipedia absolutely has a conservative bent, I wouldn't call the editing body "liberal" for using a newspaper owned by a union-busting multibillionaire as a source You didn't really respond to the assertion that all American politicians are right-wing, but it's true. We have a "blood and soil" far right party and a "diverse corporate oligopoly" center-right party.
      - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
        > You didn't really respond to the assertion that all American politicians are right-wing, but it's true. "Two people repeating it on HN comments" != "it's true". It really boils down to: What's your standard of reference? You seem to want to use Europe (I assume) as the standard for defining left and right in US politics. Why do you consider that a reasonable thing to do? And even if you consider it a reasonable thing, why Europe? Why not Asia? Or the Middle East? Or Africa? Or the world as a whole? Or why not, you know, use the US as the standard for judging what left and right are in US politics?
        krageon 5y ago
        Are you under the impression that if the hypothetical scope were moved off of Europe (why even assume it is on there?), US political parties would seem less unilaterally right-wing? I don't think you could make a coherent (and truthful) case for that, but I might be interested to read it.
        AnimalMuppet 5y ago
        Well, if you put the focus on the Middle East, I'm pretty sure every US party would be extremely left-wing. Now, I agree that the Middle East is not where the standard of reference should be, but it's the area that I'm pretty sure of how we compare. Others are more tricky. Central and South America? There are countries there that we are clearly to the right of, but also some that we align somewhat with. I don't recall whether there are currently any right-wing dictatorships there. Asia? We could be to the left of some countries there. I don't have a good idea of how to describe where China is right now - are they right or left? They kind of have elements of both. At least some parties in India are to the right of the US. I don't have a good feel for Africa, though I'd bet that in at least some countries, some parties are to the right of the US. So... it's complicated. I think I can make a... a "case" might be overstating it, but at least a handwaving argument that if you move the focus off of Europe, then US political parties are less clearly right-wing. But an actual case? That would take something like a worldwide ranking of political parties on a left-right axis, which is data that I freely admit that I do not have.
x0x0 5y ago
Nazis: https://www.wired.com/story/one-womans-mission-to-rewrite-nazi-history-wikipedia/ https://www.wired.com/story/one-womans-mission-to-rewrite-na... Then there's this: > Most of Scottish Wikipedia Written By American in Mangled English https://www.vice.com/en/article/wxqy8x/most-of-scottish-wikipedia-written-by-american-in-mangled-english https://www.vice.com/en/article/wxqy8x/most-of-scottish-wiki... Some examples of the writing here: https://twitter.com/NeerajKA/status/1298579510581960705 https://twitter.com/NeerajKA/status/1298579510581960705 And finally, I remember some translated wikipedia language was mostly written by like 10 people and went kind of nuts, but I can't find a link. This stuff is like @tptacek bait -- I heard of these by reading his twitter.
- nextaccountic 5y ago
  Those two are examples of lone individuals spreading misinformation, but not a concerted effort of Wikimedia itself or one of its chapters
  - x0x0 5y ago
    Using wikipedia. Wikipedia can't disclaim the information on wikipedia.org if they want to be a credible organization.
  - lelandfe 5y ago
    And the first example isn’t even that - it’s an editor who is trying to reduce the usage of sources that stem from Nazi propaganda and to limit flowery unsourced language around the Nazis. Other editors get in her way, but that’s still in good faith. Not exactly a situation that backs up that commenter’s point, for sure.
- dredmorbius 5y ago
  The first is not an example of misinformation at all. The second isn't politically motivated, but simple vandalism.
  - x0x0 5y ago

KerrickStaley 5y ago

That's not what's happening here though. China has for years put enormous effort into promoting its worldview on the China/Taiwan issue in every way it can, even though that worldview contradicts the facts on the ground. Taiwan is de-facto an independent country with its own government and military sovereignty, and the majority of citizens of Taiwan are happy with that arrangement. China saying that Wikipedia Taiwan is spreading misinformation is just an effort to warp reality to fit China's alternate-universe version of the facts.

plantain00 5y ago
Taiwan's official name is Republic of China(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan), it's not China/Taiwan issue, it's China Civil War. Just like Democratic People's Republic of Korea and Republic of Korea(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korea), the two China and the two Korea will unify finally.
CogitoCogito 5y ago
Taiwan (i.e. the ROC) is not a "de-facto" country, it _is_ a country. I don't get the feeling you're anti-Taiwan, but I think calling Taiwan a "de-facto" implicitly questions its status and should be avoided.
- anakaine 5y ago
  I'm reasonably certain the "de-facto" wording is used as Taiwan isn't actually recognised formally and fully as an independent country internationally. Thats not to say it shouldn't be, but it acknowledges the current truth.
  - thefringthing 5y ago
    They don't even officially acknowledge themselves to be an independent country; they claim all of China as their territory, not just Taiwan.
    - 5y ago