Wikipedia is a problem for Musk/Trump. Not, as Musk says, because it's "woke." Because it's one of our last reliable tethers to a consensus reality. Therefore, an antidote to disinformation.
It's not making anyone money. It's not enshittified. Of course it's not perfectโit's an endeavor of imperfect cooperating humans. But it needs protection and support.
newsweek.com/elon-musk-takes-aโฆ
Elon Musk Takes Aim at Wikipedia
The billionaire has become one of the most prominent supporters of President-elect Donald Trump.James Bickerton (Newsweek)
like this
reshared this
RonSupportsYou
in reply to James Gleick • • •Stefan Monnier
in reply to RonSupportsYou • • •Konfetti ๐๐ณ
in reply to Stefan Monnier • • •Unfortunately #wikipedia doesn't really offer a neutral view of the world. Only about 13 % of the authors are women. There were projects to change it, but many women (including me) were put off quickly because of the behaviour of other authors & especially the admins. When you write an article about a woman odds are high it will be deleted quickly, bc it's not relevant.The idea is good, but the implementation is biased. #ProjectRewrite #feminism #GenderEquality
James Gleick
in reply to Konfetti ๐๐ณ • • •@Konfettispaghetti @monnier @RonSupportsYou I'm not blind to this problem. I wrote about it a decade ago. It still exists.
around.com/wikipedias-women-prโฆ
Wikipediaโs Women Problem (2013) - James Gleick
James GleickGhostOnTheHalfShell reshared this.
HistoPol (#HP) ๐ด ๐บ๐ธ ๐ด
in reply to James Gleick • • •Exactly!
mas.to/@gleick/113710366535073โฆ
James Gleick
2024-12-24 23:21:37
SnowshadowII
in reply to James Gleick • • •Marco Bresciani reshared this.
Christian Pietsch
in reply to SnowshadowII • • •@SnowshadowII
If this was a serious suggestion, please don't scrape the Wikipedia website.
Torrent the dump instead: meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Data_dโฆ
Or get @kiwix and download a ZIM file containing the Wikipedia in the language of your choice.
Data dump torrents - Meta
meta.wikimedia.orgDr Pen reshared this.
Dark Phoenix
in reply to SnowshadowII • • •Not a techie here, so if this is a dumb question, forgive me.
Wouldn't you need a LOT of bytes to download all of Wikipedia? Like significantly more than my computer has available?
SnowshadowII
in reply to Dark Phoenix • • •@Darkphoenix
NOT a silly question. (there are NO silly tech questions)
Here's the solution:
fedifreu.de/@chpietsch/1137104โฆ
ETA: and if you don't understand how to ...send out an S.O>S to all the techies on fedi using the Tech and Fediverse and computer hashtags--someone is sure to reply
Christian Pietsch
2024-12-24 23:48:00
Dark Phoenix
in reply to SnowshadowII • • •Dark Phoenix
in reply to Dark Phoenix • • •SnowshadowII
in reply to Dark Phoenix • • •Unlike most people here, I am really bad with providing verbal instructions, I am more of a "here, let me show you using hands on" teacher, I am sorry. But if you give a shout out to Fedivers someone will explain it better, in the meantime...
Here's an explanation to start:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitTorreโฆ
peer-to-peer file sharing protocol
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)Dark Phoenix
in reply to SnowshadowII • • •SnowshadowII
in reply to Dark Phoenix • • •@Darkphoenix
You're welcome.
You still download it but using torrent prevents a massive traffic jam on the internet
martin_fff
in reply to SnowshadowII • • •Stay Informed During the Apocalypse with an Off-Grid Wikipedia Device
Cabe Atwell (Hackster.io)GhostOnTheHalfShell reshared this.
TheNovemberFella โ๐ณ๏ธโ๐ ๐บ๐ฆโธ๏ธ๐ฐ๏ธ๐
in reply to James Gleick • • •Dark Phoenix
in reply to James Gleick • • •Kid Mania
in reply to James Gleick • • •I'm so tired of this asshole.
Key a Tesla as stress relief.
Brandon Bennett
in reply to Kid Mania • • •Kid Mania
in reply to Brandon Bennett • • •@nemith
I dunno. If someone gave their hard-earned money to this fucking piece of shit to buy a fucking Tesla...
ยฏ\_(ใ)_/ยฏ
๐ Merry-fucking-Xmas.
๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐
Brandon Bennett
in reply to Kid Mania • • •Kid Mania
in reply to Brandon Bennett • • •@nemith
" I have a Tesla ."
๐ ๐ ๐ ๐คฃ
"Are you serious?"
No.
No. I'm not.
But I knew a whole fuck of a lot of a people who are. I'd dump that.
๐ โ ๏ธ ๐
Brandon Bennett
in reply to Kid Mania • • •Kid Mania
in reply to Brandon Bennett • • •๐ ๐ ๐
โ...๐๐จ๐ฎ ๐ค๐๐๐ฉ ๐ญ๐๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ข๐ง๐ ๐ฆ๐ ๐ฒ๐จ๐ฎ ๐๐จ๐ง'๐ญ ๐ฐ๐๐ง๐ญ ๐ฏ๐ข๐จ๐ฅ๐๐ง๐๐? ๐๐จ๐จ๐ฅ, ๐๐ฎ๐ญ ๐ฅ๐๐ญ'๐ฌ ๐๐ ๐๐ฅ๐๐๐ซ - ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐จ๐ญ๐ก๐๐ซ ๐ญ๐๐๐ฆ ๐ก๐๐ฌ ๐ง๐จ ๐ฌ๐ฎ๐๐ก ๐ช๐ฎ๐๐ฅ๐ฆ๐ฌ. ๐๐ก๐๐ฌ๐ ๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ข๐จ๐ง๐๐ข๐ซ๐๐ฌ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ฎ๐๐ค๐ข๐ง๐ ๐ค๐ข๐ฅ๐ฅ ๐ฒ๐จ๐ฎ, ๐ญ๐จ ๐ค๐๐๐ฉ ๐๐จ๐ข๐ง๐ ๐๐๐ฉ๐ข๐ญ๐๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ๐ฆ ๐จ๐ง ๐ ๐๐จ๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ง๐ ๐ฉ๐ฅ๐๐ง๐๐ญ. ๐๐ก๐๐ฒ'๐ซ๐ ๐ข๐ง๐ฌ๐ญ๐๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ข๐ง๐ ๐๐๐ฌ๐๐ข๐ฌ๐ฆ ๐ฌ๐จ ๐ฒ๐จ๐ฎ ๐๐จ๐ง'๐ญ ๐ก๐๐ฏ๐ ๐ ๐๐ก๐จ๐ข๐๐, ๐ญ๐ก๐๐ฒ'๐ซ๐ ๐๐จ๐ง๐ญ๐ซ๐จ๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ข๐ง๐ ๐ฉ๐จ๐ฅ๐ข๐๐ ๐ฌ๐ญ๐๐ญ๐๐ฌ ๐๐๐๐๐ฎ๐ฌ๐ ๐ญ๐ก๐๐ฒ ๐ฆ๐๐๐ง ๐ญ๐จ ๐ฉ๐ซ๐๐ฌ๐๐ซ๐ฏ๐ ๐ญ๐ก๐๐ข๐ซ ๐ฐ๐จ๐ซ๐ฅ๐ ๐จ๐ซ๐๐๐ซ, ๐ฐ๐ข๐ญ๐ก ๐ฏ๐ข๐จ๐ฅ๐๐ง๐๐ - ๐ญ๐ก๐๐ญ'๐ฌ ๐๐๐ญ๐ฎ๐๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ฒ ๐ฐ๐ก๐ฒ ๐ฌ๐๐๐ฎ๐ซ๐ข๐ญ๐ฒ ๐๐จ๐ซ๐๐๐ฌ ๐๐ฑ๐ข๐ฌ๐ญ, ๐๐ฏ๐๐ซ๐ฒ๐ฐ๐ก๐๐ซ๐...โ
--๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐ก๐จ๐๐ข๐ง๐๐๐ซ๐ข๐ญ๐๐ฌ
@AnarchoNinaWrites@oliphant.social
contrasocial
in reply to James Gleick • • •It's particularly concerning given the part of Project 2025 that takes aims at non-profits and seeks to give the government the authority to take away a non-profit's status due to "supporting terrorism" which is a term with no meaningful definition associated with it.
So if, for example, conservatives label a human rights movement like BLM "terrorist" and wikipedia simply doesn't host right-wing misinformation about the group the GOP could define that as "support for terrorist groups"
AskPippa๐จ๐ฆ
in reply to James Gleick • • •myrmepropagandist
in reply to James Gleick • • •I didn't donate to The Wikipedia for years. Because I wrote so many articles for them and thought that was an unpleasant experience* in some ways and more than enough free labor for me.
But last year I relented and started a donation and this makes me think it was a good idea after all.
It's decent enough and THAT is becoming rare online.
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
myrmepropagandist reshared this.
myrmepropagandist
in reply to myrmepropagandist • • •Oh how nice it would be were they "woke" at all.
They're just not... deeply broken.
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
Supergrobi
in reply to myrmepropagandist • • •myrmepropagandist
in reply to Supergrobi • • •It's the very best of milk for their matrices.
Tim Richards
in reply to myrmepropagandist • • •myrmepropagandist
in reply to myrmepropagandist • • •If it's not clear I think it's a good idea to donate to them if:
1. You use it.
2. You can.
3. You care at all if they continue to exist.
Now's a nice moment to start. It will bolster confidence in the face of these public attacks. You can always check in later when the winds shift and stop the donations later.
myrmepropagandist reshared this.
cobalt
in reply to myrmepropagandist • • •Toni Aittoniemi
in reply to myrmepropagandist • • •I really wish I could!
Due to legislative issues in my country, it is not possible for Wikimedia Foundation to collect donations from here.
And we have a right-wing goverment with some Maga-symphatizers in power right now, too.. ๐ฌ
#suomi #rahankerรคyslaki #wikipedia #lahjoitukset
Jonathan Kamens
in reply to myrmepropagandist • • •There's also an endowment worth over $140 million.
Also, according to the most recent IRS Form 990, the CEO makes over $500k per year.
Arguably they don't need your support, and there are other worthy charities that very much do.
Ref:
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipediaโฆ
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipediaโฆ
wikimediaendowment.org/wp-contโฆ
myrmepropagandist
in reply to Jonathan Kamens • • •That's good. If they can get a boost in donations they could pad that a little more. It's nice that their finances are transparent, isn't it?
That's a decent endowment but not as much as it seems for one of the most popular websites on the internet in the whole world.
You've brought this up before, but I do not agree that we don't need to worry about the first and most common source that people use globally.
I don't think we should be that naive.
myrmepropagandist reshared this.
myrmepropagandist
in reply to myrmepropagandist • • •@jik
500K is a fat paycheck, but it is not obscene. Maybe we can complain at them and get it down to 250k but any less than that wouldn't be reasonable.
I'm not exactly an uncritical fan of The Wikipedia at all.
But come on.
Michael T. Bacon, Ph.D.
in reply to myrmepropagandist • • •Right, people get salty about six figure salaries and the obscene reality is that thatโs logarithmically closer to the poverty line than the income of most Fortune 500 CEOs.
myrmepropagandist
in reply to Michael T. Bacon, Ph.D. • • •@MichaelTBacon @jik
I'm all for finding someone to do the job for maybe a third less. That's part of the oversight they live with and that's good.
Too many things have no such oversight.
Think of a 22 million dollar salary, and that dwarfed by stock options and who knows what else self dealing.
Maverynthia๐ฑ
in reply to myrmepropagandist • • •Why does the CEO need that much money at all. It's a non-profit (or supposed to be) that's money that can go back into the project. No Wikipedia DOES NOT need to beg for donations so the CEO can pay for his luxuries.
James Gleick
in reply to Maverynthia๐ฑ • • •Jonathan Kamens
in reply to myrmepropagandist • • •They've got ~1.5 years worth of operating expenses in the bank. If their finances get worse we'll have plenty of time to donate then. Whereas trans and abortion rescue organizations e.g. are desperate for cash _now_.
The pleas for donations that display constantly on the site, which don't mention their huge cash reserves, don't seem particularly transparent to me.
myrmepropagandist
in reply to Jonathan Kamens • • •The only non-profits that are durable and get things done have big endowments. It is the correct way to operate.
Jonathan Kamens
in reply to myrmepropagandist • • •I brought it up because I think people deserve the transparency you mentioned, and (as I said) I don't think Wikipedia is proactively transparent about this.
Personally, my charity dollars will go to orgs that are much more desperate and whose work more directly impact people's literal survival under a fascist regime.
Jeff Mitchell
in reply to myrmepropagandist • • •A couple things occur when I read this article.
1. If Musk is telling his supporters not to donate, regardless if it has an impact on donations, it means that it is a target. Dude is now the king of disinformation attacking anything trying to maintain reality. Definitely requires support.
2. People in these articles talk as if "woke" is a bad thing, an insult. It isn't to me. Diversity and inclusion being used as negatives. I refuse to allow up to be down.
Stu
in reply to myrmepropagandist • • •@futurebird @jik you know, if Musk is potentially going after them, a couple of hundred million feels like it could melt away fairly quickly in a big lawsuit. It's a lot of money, but it's not "one of the most visited websites in the world" lot of money, especially when you look at the others.
I think I'll start donating again.
Sensible Crone
in reply to myrmepropagandist • • •myrmepropagandist
in reply to Sensible Crone • • •@susiemagoo
I do not love to be reminded.
LOL.
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
LucyG
in reply to myrmepropagandist • • •eh
in reply to myrmepropagandist • • •Jay Stephens
in reply to myrmepropagandist • • •Yeah I think It's super important to hold things like Wikipedia, the Fediverse, Signal, Firefox etc. to very low standards.
Obviously that doesn't mean "don't criticise", or "don't try to improve".
But at the end of the day we need to support anything that offers even a partial alternative to the dismal, billionaire-run main square of the web, no matter how imperfect.
Joe
in reply to James Gleick • • •Lukas Brausch
in reply to James Gleick • • •horatiorama
in reply to James Gleick • • •Toni Aittoniemi
in reply to James Gleick • • •Then they came for childrenโs books, but it wasnโt my state so I didnโt care.
Then they came for womenโs bodily autonomy, but I was male so I didnโt care.
Then they came for social media, but I went to other platforms so I didnโt care.
Then they came for wikipediaโฆ
What are you gonna do?
John Breen
in reply to James Gleick • • •CTraceyWrites
in reply to James Gleick • • •MartinL_NZ โ๏ธ
in reply to James Gleick • • •And see a shrink.
LFpete
in reply to James Gleick • • •xs4me2
in reply to James Gleick • • •Worth defending itโฆ
#wikipedia
Shannon Skinner (she/her)
in reply to James Gleick • • •I donate annually to Wikipedia. I decided last night that my New Year's resolution is to take stock of my life's knowledge and engage more there as a contributor.
Funny how Wikipedia used to be the butt of jokes as a reliable info source, and now I trust it more than the mainstream media.
๐ฌ๐ฑ๐จ๐ฆ๐ต๐ฆ
in reply to James Gleick • • •Candace Robb
in reply to James Gleick • • •RealGravitas
in reply to James Gleick • • •I also highly recommend it. #wikipedia
Ralimba
in reply to James Gleick • • •๊ฎ liilliil ๐ซ๐ฏ๐ฑ๐จ๐ฑ๐ง
in reply to James Gleick • • •wikipedia is not โantidote to disinformationโ
wikipedia is mostly disinformation by itโs nature
You want an example? I once intentionally put a fake on wikipedia. This fake was reprinted by several newspapers, which were โauthoritative sourcesโ for wikipedia. All further attempts to roll back the information to the true state were rebuffed by the wikipedia administration
James Gleick
in reply to ๊ฎ liilliil ๐ซ๐ฏ๐ฑ๐จ๐ฑ๐ง • • •Peter G
in reply to James Gleick • • •Nemo_bis ๐
in reply to Peter G • • •en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Haeโฆ
User:HaeB/Timeline of distributed Wikipedia proposals - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.orgPeter G
in reply to Nemo_bis ๐ • • •primalmotion
in reply to James Gleick • • •Kenneth P Mitton
in reply to James Gleick • • •JM MD PhD
in reply to James Gleick • • •lin11c
in reply to James Gleick • • •Siobhan
in reply to James Gleick • • •Doreen32128
in reply to James Gleick • • •Lee
in reply to James Gleick • • •๐จ๐ฆ๐ฉ๐ช๐จ๐ณๅผ ๆฎฟๆ๐จ๐ณ๐ฉ๐ช๐จ๐ฆ
in reply to James Gleick • • •them#tic
in reply to James Gleick • • •MisterMultiverse
in reply to James Gleick • • •The Turtle
in reply to James Gleick • • •toa5t
in reply to James Gleick • • •Doug Grinbergs
in reply to James Gleick • • •Daedalean
in reply to James Gleick • • •Dean F.
in reply to James Gleick • • •Michael Potter
in reply to James Gleick • • •Without our shared reality from information sources like Wikipedia, journalism, academia, democracy ends up stifled, which is probably what these people are after.
I think Wikipedia, like the Internet Archive, are making plans to mirror globally so that if they are banned in the US they can continue elsewhere.
Wyatt (๐ณ๏ธโโง๏ธโ?)
in reply to James Gleick • • •changing to the vector 2022 theme for instance, was done after consensus failed to be reached without attempting to reach consensus again, citing that they'd "made changes to fix the criticisms" - and then they required actual consensus to revert to the old skin.
wikipedia is not immune to power plays.
James Gleick
in reply to Wyatt (๐ณ๏ธโโง๏ธโ?) • • •Stuart Celarier
in reply to James Gleick • • •What an awful human being.
Musk has just made me increase my contribution to Wikipedia. Won't you join me?
James Gleick
in reply to Stuart Celarier • • •Astrius
in reply to James Gleick • • •zetabeta
in reply to James Gleick • • •first amendment is about that government should not interfere with publications. technically speaking elon musk is not a government but practically bought it. wikipedia is almost perfect example of publication what government should not interfere.
wikipedia is not perfect with biases. maybe there should be alternate version from many political directions.
it seems it is almost righties who have issues with mass information flow. and want to interfere with other's everything.
JamesLundblad
in reply to James Gleick • • •JamesLundblad
in reply to James Gleick • • •Make your donation now - Wikimedia Foundation
donate.wikimedia.orgThe Shaking Earth
in reply to James Gleick • • •stach78
in reply to James Gleick • • •Phil Landmeier
in reply to James Gleick • • •CatEater
in reply to James Gleick • • •Whats reliable with Wikipedia?
usingsources.fas.harvard.edu/wโฆ
Use ScienceOS. Far more reliable.
@DonNegro
Whatโs Wrong with Wikipedia?
usingsources.fas.harvard.eduJW
in reply to James Gleick • • •ProfT
in reply to James Gleick • • •katzenberger
in reply to James Gleick • • •Reminder to download @kiwix and use it to store local backups of the #Wikipedia, in all languages that you speak.
The second best moment, with the best one having been the time before Wikipedia allowed #GenAI texts in.
Robert Berger
in reply to James Gleick • • •Of course not!
Do I trust Wikipedia?
Of course!
It doesn't exist as a money printing machine for a single person, it exists as a knowledge transport medium from human to human.
Anu Lahtinen
in reply to James Gleick • • •Ingrid_grรผnroteDemokratinAusOL
in reply to James Gleick • • •F4GRX Sรยฉbastien
in reply to James Gleick • • •Michael
in reply to James Gleick • • •Hear! Donate if you can
donate.wikimedia.org/w/index.pโฆ
Wikimedia project page
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)The Tepid Emperor
in reply to James Gleick • • •Rapha3l
in reply to James Gleick • • •"In 2022, the elder twin officially changed her name to Vivian Jenna Wilson, reflecting her gender identity as a trans woman and using her mother's surname because she no longer wished to be associated with Musk."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musโฆ
Lee ๐
in reply to James Gleick • • •Lee ๐
in reply to James Gleick • • •Is that because they are more likely to be *#&@%!s
Erika
in reply to James Gleick • • •PrinceOfDenmark
in reply to James Gleick • • •LewDSerbin
in reply to James Gleick • • •Fragarach
in reply to James Gleick • • •@Fragarach
Bollocks! I've been ignoring those annoying pop-ups, but if Evil Dusk wants rid of it, I'll set up a recurring donation.
malte
in reply to James Gleick • • •Robert Berger
in reply to James Gleick • • •Funny enough, Elon obviously fears the "public" he is trying to agitate...
"The New York Times reported in September that Musk's security apparatus has grown significantly as he has become more well-known and outspoken. He travels with many as 20 security professionals, who often carry guns and have a medical professional in tow, according to the newspaper."
You know you disgruntled too many people, if you need an army to protect you.
gunstick
in reply to James Gleick • • •Stefan Elf
in reply to James Gleick • • •Mark Burton
in reply to James Gleick • • •Okerampa
in reply to James Gleick • • •Sean O ๐โ๏ธ
in reply to James Gleick • • •My name is nobody
in reply to James Gleick • • •My name is nobody reshared this.
Atreides
in reply to James Gleick • • •Joรฃo Costa ๐๐ต๐น๐ช๐บ๐ฌ๐ง๐บ๐ฆ
in reply to James Gleick • • •I've just setup a monthly donation to #Wikipedia
I encourage everyone to do it too - it feels great ๐๐ช
Even a small amount such as $2 / month, multiplied by hundreds of thousands of people, will defeat fascists.
Together, WE are stronger, wealthier and more powerful than psychopaths like Musk.
#democracy #freedom #knowledge #activism
Whisper of Reason
in reply to James Gleick • • •I look something up in Wikipedia almost every day now - much more often than, say, 10 years ago. It's an island of actual facts-based information in the vast ocean of uneducated opinions and outright lies.
Musk's hatred towards it is utterly unsurprising, and it further confirms that Wikipedia is a good thing.
Doerk
in reply to James Gleick • • •Alastair
in reply to James Gleick • • •ProScience
in reply to James Gleick • • •Musk is a fascist.
Nuff said.
Eric Mitch
in reply to James Gleick • • •what is generally agreed to be reality, based on a consensus view
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)Nazani
in reply to James Gleick • • •Timo
in reply to James Gleick • • •Fred Brooker
in reply to James Gleick • • •JBouchez
in reply to James Gleick • • •Yogthos
in reply to James Gleick • • •this same wikipedia is your idea of being a reliable tether to a consensus reality?
chollima.org/who-is-amigao-theโฆ
cbsnews.com/news/meet-the-man-โฆ
Meet the man behind a third of what's on Wikipedia
Errol Barnett (CBS News)George Saich
in reply to James Gleick • • •roland
in reply to James Gleick • • •Whine and Grine/Stand Down Margaret
YouTubewendinoakland
in reply to James Gleick • • •cultdev
in reply to James Gleick • • •also: merveilles.town/@lrhodes/11371โฆ
L. Rhodes
2024-12-25 00:36:26
James Gleick
Unknown parent • • •david jon furbish
Unknown parent • • •I see a lot of out of date/just wrong material related to Earth and environmental science topics in which I have expertise. On the other hand, the coverage and presentation of many mathematics/probability and physics topics is generally outstanding.
RonSupportsYou
in reply to James Gleick • • •david jon furbish
in reply to James Gleick • • •Completely agreed. A task Iโve assigned myself once I finish two large writing projects, both of which are relevant to fixing Wiki pages.
OtownKim
in reply to James Gleick • • •CryptoJones โ โ โ ฝโ โ โ โ โ โ โ โ ๐ณ๏ธโ๐
in reply to James Gleick • • •chx
in reply to James Gleick • • •sorry to burst your bubble but Wikipedia is not exactly that. tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.10โฆ balkaninsight.com/2018/03/26/hโฆ theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/aโฆ and these are the ones that got discovered. I know the Hungarian far right also distorts the relevant parts. I heard Indians do too.
Beyond that, the no credentials policy guarantees real academics stay far away.
Shock an aw: US teenager wrote huge slice of Scots Wikipedia
Libby Brooks (The Guardian)Outpatientzero ๐
in reply to James Gleick • • •gotta love social media. You post a thing about why Wikipedia is worth defending in the face of the hostility of the fascists and every yahoo within shouting distance jumps aboard to tell you why Wikipedia is terrible.
And we wonder why the fascists keep winning the battle for hearts and minds.
James Gleick reshared this.
Sohan Hasan
in reply to James Gleick • • •see more.....surl.li/ezucxc
Surli redirect page
surl.liCyberDean07 โ
in reply to James Gleick • • •mbeddedDev
in reply to James Gleick • • •Interesting: People on Wikipedia are marked with words like "problematic" or "conspiracist" even if they aren't. Just because some people at Wikipedia think they have to follow some ideologists..
Wikipedia is everything but not the reality and no source of flawless truth
Joan Combs Durso
in reply to James Gleick • • •Joan Combs Durso
in reply to James Gleick • • •Lukewarm Skywalker
in reply to James Gleick • • •Excuse me, have you seen the CEO's salary? I'd rather support Internet Archive myself.