By Frank Sanello, Living Person and subject of a Wikipedia biographical article
Editor’s note: Ladies and gentlemen, the story you are about to read is true. Only the names have been changed (to WikiPseudonyms) to protect the guilty.
One of the many arenas of battle at Wikipedia is the question of “notability” of public figures; are they sufficiently “notable” (i.e., have they attracted enough media coverage) to merit the glorious distinction of a Wikipedia biographical article? There have been many puerile debates at Wikipedia over whether to “keep” or “delete” such articles.
This guest post by a Wikipedia biography subject provides an insight into how the Wikipedia sausage is made. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
In 2011, Wikipedia editor Bonadea nominated my bio on Wikipedia for deletion because it was only a stub. I got my college boyfriend, now 64 and terminally ill with
…continue reading Confessions of a Living Person
By Gregory Kohs
This article first appeared at Examiner.com
If you’re not one of the 34,000 or so people who edit the English Wikipedia at least five times per month, you may not have noticed the change that has taken place on the massive encyclopedia, but a highly controversial change has indeed been implemented by Wikipedia’s management team. In the past two weeks, a new “Visual Editor” has been deployed on Wikipedia, which purportedly enables users who want to change text in the encyclopedia to do so more easily and directly, without diving into the arcane “wikitext” markup language that has stymied many users for years. The problem is, the new software is riddled with flaws, and as of yesterday (July 19), the Wikimedia Foundation employee in charge of the deployment, Oliver Keyes, is apparently trying to hide the fact that the “old” platform was more effective at
…continue reading Wikipedia’s new editing software gets failing grade
By Delicious carbuncle Another in a series of blog posts highlighting lesser-known Wikipedia editors.
Recently there was a discussion going on at Wikimedia Commons about whether or not to delete “Symbol of Girllove.svg”. It is an image of a symbol used by pedophiles with a predilection for female children to identify one another. There used to be a version of that file on the English-language Wikipedia, but it was recently deleted (with a comment in the deletion log of “strongly, strongly inappropriate”). I referred to that image in an earlier blog post. It was hidden on the userpage of For An Angel. That user is now blocked (although not by Wikipedia’s Arbitration Committee). Ultimately, the image was deleted from Commons.
Man and His Symbols
The girllover symbol under discussion on Wikimedia Commons was used in only one place there – in Kintetsubuffalo’s gallery entitled “Favorite images”.Meet the editors: Kintetsubuffalo