Wikipedia in the news - rip and read.
-
Poetlister
- Genius
- Posts: 25599
- kołdry
- Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
- Nom de plume: Poetlister
- Location: London, living in a similar way
-
Contact:
Unread post
by Poetlister » Sat Aug 03, 2019 4:11 pm
In early June, a small number of partisan Wikipedia editors privately voted to blacklist MintPress News from use as a source on the online encyclopedia website at the behest of a Wikipedia editor who took issue with MintPress’ coverage of current events in Venezuela and Syria. At no point was MintPress ever asked to comment or allowed to respond to any of the allegations made and MintPress is unable to appeal the decision.
mintpressnews.com
Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_268#RfC:_MintPress_News (T-H-L)
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche
-
DanMurphy
- Habitué
- Posts: 3136
- Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:58 pm
- Wikipedia User: Dan Murphy
- Wikipedia Review Member: DanMurphy
Unread post
by DanMurphy » Sat Aug 03, 2019 5:10 pm
Fairly explicit propaganda outfit with some creepy ties to the Assad government in Syria (and this has been public knowledge since at least 2013). So on the one hand, good call.
But on the other, pathetic that it was being used on their website to back up statements of fact for so long.
-
Katie
- Gregarious
- Posts: 674
- Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:47 pm
Unread post
by Katie » Sat Aug 03, 2019 5:43 pm
DanMurphy wrote:Fairly explicit propaganda outfit with some creepy ties to the Assad government in Syria (and this has been public knowledge since at least 2013). So on the one hand, good call.
But on the other, pathetic that it was being used on their website to back up statements of fact for so long.
Speaking of propaganda websites with ties to governments, iuvmpress.com is used on Wikipedia as a source in the
Human rights in Saudi Arabia (T-H-L) article - while I despise the regime, perhaps a website very likely tied to the Iranian government shouldn't be used as a source there? Here's a story linking iuvmpress to the Iranian government:
linkhttps://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKCN1LD2R9[/link].
-
Poetlister
- Genius
- Posts: 25599
- Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
- Nom de plume: Poetlister
- Location: London, living in a similar way
-
Contact:
Unread post
by Poetlister » Sat Aug 03, 2019 8:22 pm
It takes far too long for someone to notice and care strongly enough to do something about it. Yet another example of the lack of editorial control.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche
-
Bezdomni
- Habitué
- Posts: 2935
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:07 pm
- Wikipedia User: RosasHills
- Location: Monster Vainglory ON (.. party HQ ..)
-
Contact:
Unread post
by Bezdomni » Sat Aug 03, 2019 9:40 pm
Looks like it was also covered without naming names a few days earlier in the NYT, so I deleted/replaced the 3 refs I found on en.wp. There's only one on fr.wp.
los auberginos
-
Katie
- Gregarious
- Posts: 674
- Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:47 pm
Unread post
by Katie » Sat Aug 03, 2019 10:53 pm
Bezdomni wrote:
Looks like it was also covered without naming names a few days earlier in the NYT, so I deleted/replaced the 3 refs I found on en.wp. There's only one on fr.wp.
Thank you very much! I suspect it was added by the
Ane wiki (T-C-L) paid editor sock ring. They're very likely continuing to edit using accounts like
RobZes (T-C-L),
Betje57 (T-C-L) and
BJohn1087 (T-C-L).
-
Earthy Astringent
- Banned
- Posts: 1548
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 7:16 am
Unread post
by Earthy Astringent » Sun Aug 04, 2019 4:46 am
DanMurphy wrote:Fairly explicit propaganda outfit with some creepy ties to the Assad government in Syria (and this has been public knowledge since at least 2013). So on the one hand, good call.
But on the other, pathetic that it was being used on their website to back up statements of fact for so long.
Still, having such a small subset of people making such a decision that effects everyone is not ideal. Then when people challenge a decision the peepul scream “but consensus!!!!”
A consensus from a small sample is not a consensus at all.
-
DanMurphy
- Habitué
- Posts: 3136
- Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:58 pm
- Wikipedia User: Dan Murphy
- Wikipedia Review Member: DanMurphy
Unread post
by DanMurphy » Sun Aug 04, 2019 5:41 am
Earthy Astringent wrote:DanMurphy wrote:Fairly explicit propaganda outfit with some creepy ties to the Assad government in Syria (and this has been public knowledge since at least 2013). So on the one hand, good call.
But on the other, pathetic that it was being used on their website to back up statements of fact for so long.
Still, having such a small subset of people making such a decision that effects everyone is not ideal. Then when people challenge a decision the peepul scream “but consensus!!!!”
A consensus from a small sample is not a consensus at all.
Shit. In professional organizations with much higher accountability stakes, these kinds of decisions are often made by a committee of one. And it works much better.
-
Poetlister
- Genius
- Posts: 25599
- Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
- Nom de plume: Poetlister
- Location: London, living in a similar way
-
Contact:
Unread post
by Poetlister » Sun Aug 04, 2019 10:26 am
DanMurphy wrote:Earthy Astringent wrote:A consensus from a small sample is not a consensus at all.
Shit. In professional organizations with much higher accountability stakes, these kinds of decisions are often made by a committee of one. And it works much better.
Yes, but the one person is rather more likely to be someone who is well-informed and competent. If there's an obscure discussion with most of the participants being people canvassed by the person who started the discussion, the result will be pretty biased.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche
-
Bezdomni
- Habitué
- Posts: 2935
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:07 pm
- Wikipedia User: RosasHills
- Location: Monster Vainglory ON (.. party HQ ..)
-
Contact:
Unread post
by Bezdomni » Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:53 pm
MintPress responds,
naming names and reminding people of a little wiki-history.
los auberginos
-
mendaliv
- Habitué
- Posts: 1343
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:35 pm
- Wikipedia User: mendaliv
Unread post
by mendaliv » Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:58 pm
Bezdomni wrote:MintPress responds,
naming names and reminding people of a little wiki-history.
Of the Wikipedia editors who voted to discredit MintPress, several were self-listed as experts in video games, computer science and anime, not geopolitical events
That is a SICK burn.
“It is a fair summary of history to say that the safeguards of liberty have frequently been forged in controversies involving not very nice people.” United States v. Rabinowitz, 339 U.S. 56, 68, 69 (1950) (Frankfurter, J. dissenting).
-
Zoloft
- Trustee
- Posts: 13984
- Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:54 pm
- Wikipedia User: Stanistani
- Wikipedia Review Member: Zoloft
- Actual Name: William Burns
- Nom de plume: William Burns
- Location: San Diego
-
Contact:
Unread post
by Zoloft » Thu Aug 08, 2019 1:21 am
I feel a bit dirty reading that. MintPress has a loose grip on the facts.
My avatar is sometimes indicative of my mood:
- Actual mug ◄
- Uncle Cornpone
- Zoloft bouncy pill-thing
-
Poetlister
- Genius
- Posts: 25599
- Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
- Nom de plume: Poetlister
- Location: London, living in a similar way
-
Contact:
Unread post
by Poetlister » Thu Aug 08, 2019 12:18 pm
Bezdomni wrote:MintPress responds,
naming names and reminding people of a little wiki-history.
I think I'd already linked that in my opening post.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche
-
Poetlister
- Genius
- Posts: 25599
- Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
- Nom de plume: Poetlister
- Location: London, living in a similar way
-
Contact:
Unread post
by Poetlister » Thu Aug 08, 2019 12:19 pm
Zoloft wrote:MintPress has a loose grip on the facts.
Yes, that's precisely why it can't be recognised as a reliable source!
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche