Difference between revisions of "Talk:Wikipedia"
| (381 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | [[Talk:Wikipedia/archive1|Archive 1]] | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | + | =Page archived= | |
| − | + | [[User:JonM|JonM]] 15:15, 21 December 2011 (EST) | |
| − | |||
| − | + | == GFDL issue is dubious == | |
| − | + | Out of caution, I did not remove the section outright as I planned to do, but I would like to raise this issue on the talk page. | |
| − | + | Could someone point me to the specific provisions of the GFDL that '''require''' Wikipedia to continue making content available to the public once it has been published online? If Wikipedia deletes content or otherwise makes it unavailable, I don't see any obligation for them to continue providing texts and attributions required by distribution of that text. Further, the anti-DRM provisions are aimed at reusers who want to deny downstream persons the rights of the GFDL, and I don't think Wikipedia is opposed to sites mirroring deleted content. [[User:GregG|GregG]] 17:11, 22 July 2012 (EDT) | |
| − | == " | + | == Source does not demonstrate that Wikipedia is "left-wing communist", there are right-wing editors who edit there and evidence shown on Wikipedia on mass killings by communist regimes. Why is this not being accounted for? == |
| − | This | + | This link http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4840340.stm was used as a source to say that Wikipedia is "left-wing communist". Nowhere in the source does it say that Wikipedia is "left-wing" or "communist". There are conservative and right-wing editors who work on Wikipedia, why are the contributions of conservative and right-wing editors on Wikipedia not acknowledged here?.--[[User:TheQuestioner|TheQuestioner]] 11:28, 3 August 2012 (EDT) |
| − | : | + | The claim ignores material like this:, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conservative_Wikipedians or this article titled "Mass killings under Communist regimes" at this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_Communist_regimes which is obviously not pro-communist but shows that communist regimes have committed mass murder. Why is info like this not accounted for?--[[User:TheQuestioner|TheQuestioner]] 11:43, 3 August 2012 (EDT) |
| − | + | == -Nazi == | |
| − | + | I see no evidence & not citations to prove that Wikipedia has Nazi influence. Liberalism / Progressivism should be apparent, but not Nazi. I suggest delete the term Nazi. ([[User:Thunkful2|Thunkful2]] ([[User talk:Thunkful2|talk]]) 18:01, 13 August 2016 (EDT)) | |
| − | + | == Citation 1, First sentence. == | |
| − | + | The first citation does not support that Wikipedia is funded by "left-leaning foundations" and an "aggressive" annual fundraising drive. I would recommend modifying the statement alike to "Wikipedia is an online wiki-based encyclopedia hosted and owned by the non-profit organization Wikimedia Foundation and financially supported by grants from corporations like Apple and Amazon plus an annual online fundraising drive." (https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-just-donated-1-million-to-wikipedia-2018-9) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/12/02/wikipedia-has-a-ton-of-money-so-why-is-it-begging-you-to-donate-yours/?utm_term=.ef32d2b129ca). If I have formatted or written something incorrect/incorrectly inform me for future reference. {{unsigned|GenericGman}} | |
| − | + | :The link cited the fundraising part, though it's now a dead link (link rot). The "left-leaning" part can be plainly observed, so I don't think a citation is needed. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:47, 20 January 2019 (EST) | |
| − | + | ==Patrick Byrne== | |
| + | Patrick Byrne, cited in this article, resurfaces (related to the Russia collusion/[[Maria Butina]]/[[NRA]] case). [https://saraacarter.com/russia-probe-twist-a-billion-dollar-ceo-a-convicted-russian-agent-and-the-fbi/ Russia Probe Twist: A Billion Dollar CEO, A Convicted Russian Agent And The FBI.] Byrne gave [https://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Naked_short_selling permission to publish his article for CP here]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 11:30, 29 July 2019 (EDT) | ||
| − | + | :I had communicated with Patrick Byrne in 2008 through gmail; I cannot access his Fox Business interview today through Google, Twitter, or the Fox News website. I did get it [https://finance.yahoo.com/video/former-overstock-ceo-patrick-byrne-215248855.html from Yahoo Finance]. The interview is worth watching. | |
| + | |||
| + | :Google algorithms evidently are already in place to disrupt electronic communications between "like minded" individuals in advancxe of the 2020 elections. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 21:18, 22 August 2019 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Commercial and government backing of WP == | ||
| + | |||
| + | Here is an interesting piece, which might be useful as a reference: [https://www.zerohedge.com/political/wikipedia-disinformation-operation] --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">DavidB4</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 16:50, 10 March 2020 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Does it really have a leftist bias on talk pages?== | ||
| + | I would dispute this article's claim that Wikipedia has a leftist bias on talk pages. I left a note on the talk page of the article on [[Margaret Thatcher]], saying that Margaret Thatcher was arguably the worst Prime Minister ever to have occupied Number Ten Downing Street, and this was soon removed. I also pointed out on the talk page of the Wikipedia article on the Conservative Party of the United Kingdom that although the Conservatives are meant to stand for freedom, you'll often find it is the ones who are Conservative who take freedom away from others. This too got removed. [[User:Carltonio|Carltonio]] ([[User talk:Carltonio|talk]]) 11:57, 9 June 2020 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Wikipedia IS Left == | ||
| + | I put the facts that Joe Biden praises China and I just got banned forever for doing that, so I will come here. Thanks. [[User:Punish China|Punish China]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Bigoted falsehoods== | ||
| + | [[User:Conservative]], in his war on atheism, falsely claimed, without evidence, that Wikipedia co-founder [[Larry Sanger]] was an atheist. In so doing, he tried to link Sanger to [[bestiality]]. Sanger was never an atheist. Unfortunately, Conservapedia's credibility and reputation was damaged when the false claim was repeated in [https://therightscoop.com/why-should-a-conservative-bother-using-wikipedia/ conservative media.] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''The Truth. Just Putin It Out There'']]</sup> 01:40, August 4, 2024 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Will [[User:Conservative]] apologize to Mr. Sanger and the [[Conservapedia]] community for the harm he has done in his exuberance to slam his personal enemies as "atheists", people who are practitioners or tolerant of bestiality, fat atheists, or if they believe in God, then merely "obese"? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''The Truth. Just Putin It Out There'']]</sup> 03:26, August 4, 2024 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :Let the record show it's been 4 days with no response regarding false information in [[Conservapedia]]'s 5th most visited page, despite the offending party having been active in the interim. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''The Truth. Just Putin It Out There'']]</sup> 21:28, August 8, 2024 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :When Sanger left Wikipedia, he took a lot of wiki developers and experienced editors with him. In 2020, Sanger published ''God Exists''. We could have asked Sanger and his following for help, but [[User:Conservative]], in his zeal to [[demonize]] anyone he perceives as a "fat atheist", has probably made that difficult if not impossible. And User:Conservative's refusal now to accept responsibility for his errors and the damage he has caused to Conservapedia and its reputation only underscores how much of an uncooperative editor he has been, and remains. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''The Truth. Just Putin It Out There'']]</sup> 06:48, August 9, 2024 (EDT) | ||
Latest revision as of 10:52, August 9, 2024
Page archived
JonM 15:15, 21 December 2011 (EST)
GFDL issue is dubious
Out of caution, I did not remove the section outright as I planned to do, but I would like to raise this issue on the talk page.
Could someone point me to the specific provisions of the GFDL that require Wikipedia to continue making content available to the public once it has been published online? If Wikipedia deletes content or otherwise makes it unavailable, I don't see any obligation for them to continue providing texts and attributions required by distribution of that text. Further, the anti-DRM provisions are aimed at reusers who want to deny downstream persons the rights of the GFDL, and I don't think Wikipedia is opposed to sites mirroring deleted content. GregG 17:11, 22 July 2012 (EDT)
Source does not demonstrate that Wikipedia is "left-wing communist", there are right-wing editors who edit there and evidence shown on Wikipedia on mass killings by communist regimes. Why is this not being accounted for?
This link http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4840340.stm was used as a source to say that Wikipedia is "left-wing communist". Nowhere in the source does it say that Wikipedia is "left-wing" or "communist". There are conservative and right-wing editors who work on Wikipedia, why are the contributions of conservative and right-wing editors on Wikipedia not acknowledged here?.--TheQuestioner 11:28, 3 August 2012 (EDT)
The claim ignores material like this:, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conservative_Wikipedians or this article titled "Mass killings under Communist regimes" at this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_Communist_regimes which is obviously not pro-communist but shows that communist regimes have committed mass murder. Why is info like this not accounted for?--TheQuestioner 11:43, 3 August 2012 (EDT)
-Nazi
I see no evidence & not citations to prove that Wikipedia has Nazi influence. Liberalism / Progressivism should be apparent, but not Nazi. I suggest delete the term Nazi. (Thunkful2 (talk) 18:01, 13 August 2016 (EDT))
Citation 1, First sentence.
The first citation does not support that Wikipedia is funded by "left-leaning foundations" and an "aggressive" annual fundraising drive. I would recommend modifying the statement alike to "Wikipedia is an online wiki-based encyclopedia hosted and owned by the non-profit organization Wikimedia Foundation and financially supported by grants from corporations like Apple and Amazon plus an annual online fundraising drive." (https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-just-donated-1-million-to-wikipedia-2018-9) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/12/02/wikipedia-has-a-ton-of-money-so-why-is-it-begging-you-to-donate-yours/?utm_term=.ef32d2b129ca). If I have formatted or written something incorrect/incorrectly inform me for future reference. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by GenericGman (talk)
- The link cited the fundraising part, though it's now a dead link (link rot). The "left-leaning" part can be plainly observed, so I don't think a citation is needed. --1990'sguy (talk) 14:47, 20 January 2019 (EST)
Patrick Byrne
Patrick Byrne, cited in this article, resurfaces (related to the Russia collusion/Maria Butina/NRA case). Russia Probe Twist: A Billion Dollar CEO, A Convicted Russian Agent And The FBI. Byrne gave permission to publish his article for CP here. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 11:30, 29 July 2019 (EDT)
- I had communicated with Patrick Byrne in 2008 through gmail; I cannot access his Fox Business interview today through Google, Twitter, or the Fox News website. I did get it from Yahoo Finance. The interview is worth watching.
- Google algorithms evidently are already in place to disrupt electronic communications between "like minded" individuals in advancxe of the 2020 elections. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 21:18, 22 August 2019 (EDT)
Commercial and government backing of WP
Here is an interesting piece, which might be useful as a reference: [1] --DavidB4 (TALK) 16:50, 10 March 2020 (EDT)
Does it really have a leftist bias on talk pages?
I would dispute this article's claim that Wikipedia has a leftist bias on talk pages. I left a note on the talk page of the article on Margaret Thatcher, saying that Margaret Thatcher was arguably the worst Prime Minister ever to have occupied Number Ten Downing Street, and this was soon removed. I also pointed out on the talk page of the Wikipedia article on the Conservative Party of the United Kingdom that although the Conservatives are meant to stand for freedom, you'll often find it is the ones who are Conservative who take freedom away from others. This too got removed. Carltonio (talk) 11:57, 9 June 2020 (EDT)
Wikipedia IS Left
I put the facts that Joe Biden praises China and I just got banned forever for doing that, so I will come here. Thanks. Punish China
Bigoted falsehoods
User:Conservative, in his war on atheism, falsely claimed, without evidence, that Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger was an atheist. In so doing, he tried to link Sanger to bestiality. Sanger was never an atheist. Unfortunately, Conservapedia's credibility and reputation was damaged when the false claim was repeated in conservative media. RobSThe Truth. Just Putin It Out There 01:40, August 4, 2024 (EDT)
Will User:Conservative apologize to Mr. Sanger and the Conservapedia community for the harm he has done in his exuberance to slam his personal enemies as "atheists", people who are practitioners or tolerant of bestiality, fat atheists, or if they believe in God, then merely "obese"? RobSThe Truth. Just Putin It Out There 03:26, August 4, 2024 (EDT)
- Let the record show it's been 4 days with no response regarding false information in Conservapedia's 5th most visited page, despite the offending party having been active in the interim. RobSThe Truth. Just Putin It Out There 21:28, August 8, 2024 (EDT)
- When Sanger left Wikipedia, he took a lot of wiki developers and experienced editors with him. In 2020, Sanger published God Exists. We could have asked Sanger and his following for help, but User:Conservative, in his zeal to demonize anyone he perceives as a "fat atheist", has probably made that difficult if not impossible. And User:Conservative's refusal now to accept responsibility for his errors and the damage he has caused to Conservapedia and its reputation only underscores how much of an uncooperative editor he has been, and remains. RobSThe Truth. Just Putin It Out There 06:48, August 9, 2024 (EDT)