Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wikipedia is 20

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 391 posts

Re: Wikipedia is 20

#81

Post by jjcon »

Merman_Mike wrote: post #59
admiralspoo wrote: post #23

Its reputation is severely declining, especially on topics relating to current events, figures, or politics. It, however, remains excellent for technical knowledge.

This is a current event that is extremely political: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_United_States_Capitol_pro... It cites 462 sources and the parts I read are at least as objective as any news outlet. I know that Wikipedia editors lean left. I'd be interested to see examples of this bias in Wiki entries though.

One random example I ran across recently of note to HN crowd - the creator of Javscript and Brave, Founder of Mozilla Brendan Eich.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Eich

Under known for it says, “Known for JavaScript, opposition to same-sex marriage”

Really? I’m as gay as they come but this just gives me scarlet letter vibes. I sincerely doubt people know this guy for his work opposing ssm (of which there wasn’t any, he was just opposed to it back in the day). People do know firefox, brave, mozilla etc though. In the talk page it is clear there are a couple editors with a vendetta against this guy or something.

Maybe an example of personal bias more than a left/right thing but I still found it kinda weird.

Re: Wikipedia is 20

#82

Post by elliotec »

I believe Wikipedia is not only the greatest and most perfect website to exist, but also one of the greatest accomplishments of humankind.

I rarely use such strong, ostensibly hyperbolic language without sarcasm, but I couldn't be more sincere and genuine with that statement.

It exemplifies the information age, and the "purpose" of the internet - networked information transfer. The design is simple and usable to an almost miraculous degree. The distributed sourcing of information with mind-blowing moderation is pioneering and of upmost respectability.

Its ability to endure through the onslaught of addictive capitalist pressures and sheer ethical reasonableness is something very special, resisting ads for the sake and benefit of humanity, I almost want to cry just writing about it.

I could say so much more, but what I want to get to is - Thank you Wikipedia. You have changed countless lives and spread unthinkable knowledge to unfathomable futures. Hard to believe it's only been 20 years, I can't imagine a universe without you.

Please donate if you use Wikipedia. The world needs it.

Re: Wikipedia is 20

#83

Post by Acrobatic_Road »

Merman_Mike wrote: post #59
admiralspoo wrote: post #23

Its reputation is severely declining, especially on topics relating to current events, figures, or politics. It, however, remains excellent for technical knowledge.

This is a current event that is extremely political: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_United_States_Capitol_pro... It cites 462 sources and the parts I read are at least as objective as any news outlet. I know that Wikipedia editors lean left. I'd be interested to see examples of this bias in Wiki entries though.

It was even worse before. When I read it, the opening line suggested that all of the rioters collectively murdered that cop. I think that was a little too biased for wikipedia. Does anyone have the revision?

Re: Wikipedia is 20

#84

Post by zozbot234 »

jjcon wrote: post #81
Merman_Mike wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a current event that is extremely political: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_United_States_Capitol_pro... It cites 462 sources and the parts I read are at least as objective as any news outlet. I know that Wikipedia editors lean left. I'd be interested to see examples of this bias in Wiki entries though.

One random example I ran across recently of note to HN crowd - the creator of Javscript and Brave, Founder of Mozilla Brendan Eich. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Eich Under known for it says, “Known for JavaScript, opposition to same-sex marriage” Really? I’m as gay as they come but this just gives me scarlet letter vibes. I sincerely doubt people know this guy for his work opposing ssm (of which there wasn’t…

> Really? I’m as gay as they come but this just gives me scarlet letter vibes.

I agree, I sure wouldn't want to be known for inventing JavaScript. And the name wasn't even his idea. How unfair!

Re: Wikipedia is 20

#85

Post by gregcoombe »

jjcon wrote: post #81
Merman_Mike wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a current event that is extremely political: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_United_States_Capitol_pro... It cites 462 sources and the parts I read are at least as objective as any news outlet. I know that Wikipedia editors lean left. I'd be interested to see examples of this bias in Wiki entries though.

One random example I ran across recently of note to HN crowd - the creator of Javscript and Brave, Founder of Mozilla Brendan Eich. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Eich Under known for it says, “Known for JavaScript, opposition to same-sex marriage” Really? I’m as gay as they come but this just gives me scarlet letter vibes. I sincerely doubt people know this guy for his work opposing ssm (of which there wasn’t…

The Wikipedia page dedicates an entire section to explaining that comment, under "Appointment to CEO, controversy and resignation". He was forced out of the CEO position for this political view. It was a pretty significant news story, and I think they are right for including this as part of what he is known for (particularly outside the HN community).

Re: Wikipedia is 20

#86

Post by jessriedel »

creato wrote: post #72
aerosmile wrote: post #40

I am surprised that the comments haven't mentioned the role of SEO in Wikipedia's growth and defensibility. Wikipedia's habit of deep interlinking helped it rank back in the early aughts when the SEO rules were rather simple. Add to that the subdomain-driven localization strategy and many other moves that were considered SEO best practices back in those years when the on-page factors used to matter. But that was just…

It is somehow sad that "caring about content quality" is considered SEO and not just making a good website. I think more than half the things you mentioned are only good SEO because search engines want to send people to websites they will like reading. I think when that is the case, we should be crediting people for making good websites, not good SEO.

Yea, if SEO is to have a useful meaning, it really out to be "changes you make to improve search ranking holding quality fixed".

Re: Wikipedia is 20

#87

Post by mhh__ »

kyle_martin1 wrote: post #55
admiralspoo wrote: post #23

Its reputation is severely declining, especially on topics relating to current events, figures, or politics. It, however, remains excellent for technical knowledge.

This. Wikipedia severely locks out content creators to provide balanced views on politics. It’s no secret the current content creators lean towards one side of the isle.

What does balanced mean? It's supposed to be well-cited not balanced

Re: Wikipedia is 20

#88

Post by destxD »

creato wrote: post #69
destxD wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interestingly enough the talk page is quite good to learn about current events and see every view. Though it is obvious that some mods and admins have an agenda; to be honest I didn't even realize it till I saw the war over Kamala's wiki page, super shady stuff.

What are you talking about? I just skimmed the Kamala Harris talk page and it's all bickering about trivial edits as far as I saw.

This was just before she announced her candidacy, I saw some interesting posts on Reddit. I can't say for certain what exactly happened but it was just super fishy.

Some further reading : https://old.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/gni8t5/using_wi...

https://theintercept.com/2020/07/02/kamala-harris-wikipedia/

https://old.reddit.com/r/wikipedia/comments/hk6eo3/kamala_ha... (check other discussions also)

I hope that gives a good starting point.

PS: I don't have a horse in this race, I just know my trust in wikipedia was shaken.

Re: Wikipedia is 20

#89

Post by elliotec »

jjcon wrote: post #81
Merman_Mike wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a current event that is extremely political: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_United_States_Capitol_pro... It cites 462 sources and the parts I read are at least as objective as any news outlet. I know that Wikipedia editors lean left. I'd be interested to see examples of this bias in Wiki entries though.

One random example I ran across recently of note to HN crowd - the creator of Javscript and Brave, Founder of Mozilla Brendan Eich. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Eich Under known for it says, “Known for JavaScript, opposition to same-sex marriage” Really? I’m as gay as they come but this just gives me scarlet letter vibes. I sincerely doubt people know this guy for his work opposing ssm (of which there wasn’t…

I mean, it's what he's known for. It was a very big deal when it was discovered that he opposed and donated against gay marriage. He resigned as CEO of Mozilla over it.

Many people outside of internet communities like HN first learned his name when this all went down. Creator of JS wasn't as big a deal to most people at the time as CEO of a major non profit internet company opposing one of the biggest human rights issues of our time.

Re: Wikipedia is 20

#90

Post by e12e »

creato wrote: post #66
senkora wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not very good as a learning resource for mathematics. That’s pretty minor, but it is the main point about Wikipedia that I wish were better (I know, I’m free to help out...).

I can barely believe I'm reading this comment! Wikipedia is my first and almost always only stop whenever I want to learn something related to math.

Sometimes the "simple English" version is better than the "full" English version - perhaps especially for mathematics.
Post reply on HN