4 ms·

I encourage people to read through his proposed WikiProject's page[0] and the related discussion.[1] Important context is also that WikiProjects are exempt from

by mzajc 4mo ago

I encourage people to read through his proposed WikiProject's page[0] and the related discussion.[1] Important context is also that WikiProjects are exempt from canvassing rules; members are free to notify each other of ongoing policy discussions with the goal of influencing the outcome. This is usually not a problem, but given how aggressively vague the WikiProject's goals are (eg. "We hope to open Wikipedia up to using more sources" - which?) and Larry Sanger's prior conduct (eg. advocating for whitelisting of sources like Fox News[2]), it seems the real goal was organizing conservative editors. I'm not sure whether the fact that this is not clearly written is deception or trolling, but it's not a good look for Sanger either way. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Larry_Sanger/WikiProject_Intellectual_Diversity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Larry_Sanger/WikiProject_... [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Council#Proposing_a_new_WikiProject_Intellectual_Diversity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cou... [2]: https://san.com/cc/wikipedia-co-founder-says-site-has-liberal-bias-heres-his-plan-to-fix-that/ https://san.com/cc/wikipedia-co-founder-says-site-has-libera...

dotancohen 4mo ago
> advocating for whitelisting of sources like Fox News As I understood it, he wasn't advocating for whitelisting Fox News, he was advocating for removing the blacklist. That's a stark difference. > it's not a good look for Sanger either way. What doesn't look good for him? It doesn't seem that he has an intent other than enabling the viewpoint of those other than the far-left, which compromise almost the entirety of Wikipedias admins and editors.
- vrganj 4mo ago
  Can you show me a single far left wikipedia admin?
  - archagon 4mo ago
    Heh, I remember being surprised when I looked up the editor for some great Russian history articles and saw that he identified as a straight-up monarchist. Wikipedia editors are a bunch of diverse, geeky kooks.
- jdlshore 4mo ago
  > the far-left, which compromise almost the entirety of Wikipedias admins and editors. Yeah, citation needed on that one.
- peppersghost93 4mo ago
  >he was advocating for removing the blacklist. Seems like a distinction without a difference to me. If he got his way the website would quickly be overrun with right wing misinformation campaigns. I hope he stays banned.
  - dotancohen 4mo ago
    For many topics Wikipedia is well known to be overrun with left wing campaigns - LGBT, and US political topics chief among them. I'd rather see neither side successfully oust the other. But it seems that the left got there first and is entrenched.
    - peppersghost93 4mo ago
      For many topics right wing ideas are just factually incorrect. This isn't Wikipedia's fault.
      - dotancohen 4mo ago
        [flagged]
        peppersghost93 4mo ago
        Going to have to disagree with the established science bit, and the left has a long history in western culture. You just don't like it lol
    - alextingle 4mo ago
      How is "LGBT" left wing?? Furthermore, I'm not in the US, but "US politics" doesn't seem to have much left wing about it either.
      - peppersghost93 3mo ago
        Unfortunately from a US perspective being a sexual minority/trans is left wing by default because our right wingers hate them.

by mzajc 4mo ago

dotancohen 4mo ago

> advocating for whitelisting of sources like Fox News As I understood it, he wasn't advocating for whitelisting Fox News, he was advocating for removing the blacklist. That's a stark difference. > it's not a good look for Sanger either way. What doesn't look good for him? It doesn't seem that he has an intent other than enabling the viewpoint of those other than the far-left, which compromise almost the entirety of Wikipedias admins and editors.

vrganj 4mo ago
Can you show me a single far left wikipedia admin?
- archagon 4mo ago
  Heh, I remember being surprised when I looked up the editor for some great Russian history articles and saw that he identified as a straight-up monarchist. Wikipedia editors are a bunch of diverse, geeky kooks.
jdlshore 4mo ago
> the far-left, which compromise almost the entirety of Wikipedias admins and editors. Yeah, citation needed on that one.
peppersghost93 4mo ago
>he was advocating for removing the blacklist. Seems like a distinction without a difference to me. If he got his way the website would quickly be overrun with right wing misinformation campaigns. I hope he stays banned.
- dotancohen 4mo ago
  For many topics Wikipedia is well known to be overrun with left wing campaigns - LGBT, and US political topics chief among them. I'd rather see neither side successfully oust the other. But it seems that the left got there first and is entrenched.
  - peppersghost93 4mo ago
    For many topics right wing ideas are just factually incorrect. This isn't Wikipedia's fault.
    - dotancohen 4mo ago
      [flagged]
      - peppersghost93 4mo ago
        Going to have to disagree with the established science bit, and the left has a long history in western culture. You just don't like it lol
  - alextingle 4mo ago
    How is "LGBT" left wing?? Furthermore, I'm not in the US, but "US politics" doesn't seem to have much left wing about it either.
    - peppersghost93 3mo ago
      Unfortunately from a US perspective being a sexual minority/trans is left wing by default because our right wingers hate them.