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

Stepping Down as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation

diff.wikimedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 252 posts

Re: Stepping Down as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation

#231

Post by stonogo »

jjk166 wrote: post #219
will4274 wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. The article for Bill Ayers describes him as an "elementary education theorist." That's not what he's notable for.

And the article for John Wilkes Booth describes him as an "American stage actor" even though that's not what he's known for. If you keep reading the article, however, it's almost completely about what he is known for (a statement true for both cases). That's just standard wikipedia formatting.

"Standard wikipedia formatting" being burying the lead is not a compelling defense. It's damn near misleading.

I find "an American stage actor who assassinated President Abraham Lincoln" to be a ridiculous introduction; it should read "an American assassin who killed President Abraham Lincoln" -- the man's profession is completely irrelevant; he is notable for this one act.

It isn't even consistently applied: Ted Kaczynski is listed as a domestic terrorist, Sirhan Sirhan is "a Palestinian Christian militant," but then Charles Guiteau is a "writer and lawyer."

Re: Stepping Down as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation

#232

Post by robin21 »

throwaways885 wrote: post #150
the_duke wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you cite specific examples of wrong or actually harmful information? That would give more credence to your arguments. Maybe also link to your rejected contributions to show that you are not just disgruntled because your edits were reverted. I do agree that there are lots of inaccuracies in articles, but having Wikipedia with at least somewhat helpful information is infinitely better than having nothing at all.

Political content is a landmine, articles are often locked because vandals are often indistinguishable from those with better information but still controversial.

Yeh if you read the talk pages (which are hard to find and many people wouldn’t even know about) you will find so many people pushing an agenda rather than trying to adhere to some neutrality. Small subtle changes designed to push someone’s world view.

I think it’s so rare these days to find people who can remain objective and leave their opinions at the door. Everyone seems fueled by rage, it’s like their political views are their purpose in life.

Re: Stepping Down as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation

#233

Post by Aeolun »

sph wrote: post #115
nickpp wrote: post #80

Wikipedia may have been an amazing idea in the beginning. Then it got taken over by a bunch of entrenched editors more interested in their own power than the accuracy of the pages' information. Today I can see mistakes and inaccurate info in every niche I am familiar with. Because of that, I cannot trust it on subjects I know nothing about. I tried contributing and fixing but nothing got through. Even worse, the leve…

> Wikipedia may have been an amazing idea in the beginning. > I would gladly pay for an encyclopedia written by actual experts. While you're entitled to your opinion, this is a case of "the grass is always greener on the other side". I'm not a fan of the Wikipedia internal politics, but as a user, Wikipedia is one of the best showcases of the Internet and in my opinion the greatest collaboration project in human hist…

> For the first time we have knowledge available to all, for (almost) free

That’s fantastic unless that ‘knowledge’ is wrong. We can get that kind of knowledge on Facebook.

Re: Stepping Down as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation

#234

Post by oldev »

wpietri wrote: post #227
oldev wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are a deployment engineer/Windows desktop dev, check out the article on installers. [1] Most of those are obsolete, small and pretty much useless. The one we've been using for 15 years is not listed. Check out the article history. Every time someone tries to update it and add modern, actually useful tools, someone else comes from the woodwork and deletes it. Some of the deletionists don't know what a repackage…

I looked at the last year or so of edits and didn't see anything obviously problematic. What edits specifically concern you?

OK, digging through recent history, the 12:23, 22 October 2020‎ deletion removed tools like Advanced Installer, InstallAware and RayPack. These are tools that actual deployment engineers, repackagers and Windows software developers use every day to do our job. They are also recommended by Microsoft for MSIX. [1]

I have no idea why they don't meet Wikipedia's "notability" criteria or why such a 10 or 20 years old tool has or hasn't its own page - and I don't care. The list left (other than InstallShield and WiX) is a joke and you can plainly see that none of those editors has any expertise in the field. The end result is that that article is useless or worse for anyone reading it. Which I thought was the whole point of Wikipedia.

[1] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/msix/desktop/deskto...

Re: Stepping Down as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation

#235

Post by fastball »

fastball wrote: post #209
Clewza313 wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've attended a bunch of Wikimedia/Wikimania conferences. These are held on a shoestring budget, and any drinking and dancing is on participants' own dime. WMF's per-employee T&E cost is apparently $7k/year. Working in sales at a company you've heard of, I've flown single flights and attended single dinners that cost more than that.

Yes, except WMF should not be doing sales . They're an online wikipedia. Their costs keep ballooning, and not to pay for things that I care about when I donate money to support their core mission.

Haha freudian slip there,

*online encyclopedia.

Re: Stepping Down as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation

#236

Post by will4274 »

jjk166 wrote: post #219
will4274 wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. The article for Bill Ayers describes him as an "elementary education theorist." That's not what he's notable for.

And the article for John Wilkes Booth describes him as an "American stage actor" even though that's not what he's known for. If you keep reading the article, however, it's almost completely about what he is known for (a statement true for both cases). That's just standard wikipedia formatting.

I think, if you looked a bit closer, you'd find that Wikipedia is more opinionated about certain topics than others. On Wikipedia, Ted Kaczynski is a domestic terrorist first, and a mathematician second, but Bill Ayers is an education theorist first, and a domestic terrorist second. I don't really see any "standard" here. To my eyes, the bias is fairly consistent - somewhat left of American center plus a little bit of libertarian - not dissimilar to hacker news.

I mention Bill Ayers specifically because I asked a friend if they had heard of the Weather Underground recently and they said "sounds familiar, remind me?" And I said "Google Bill Ayers" and they paused and then said "the elementary education theorist?" And I said "lol, yeah, that's funny." That first sentence is what shows in Google results on mobile devices - it matters.

Re: Stepping Down as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation

#237

Post by frabbit »

Katherine Maher is someone that was flagged up recently as what we could call "politically interesting". I wonder if that is why it was deemed time for her to move on:

https://thegrayzone.com/2020/06/11/meet-wikipedias-ayn-rand-...

While some may object that this is just The Grayzone's biased take on their disagreements with Wikipedia's odd listing of them as not a reliable source it raises some interesting questions.

Seems like the upper echelons of the USA is just as loaded with political operatives as the old East Germany, USSR or China today.

Oh, and I love wikipedia. It is one of the best things to come out of the internet expansion. Even better than the old CIA World Factbook.

Re: Stepping Down as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation

#238

Post by tedd4u »

nickpp wrote: post #80

Wikipedia may have been an amazing idea in the beginning. Then it got taken over by a bunch of entrenched editors more interested in their own power than the accuracy of the pages' information. Today I can see mistakes and inaccurate info in every niche I am familiar with. Because of that, I cannot trust it on subjects I know nothing about. I tried contributing and fixing but nothing got through. Even worse, the leve…

If you want to pay, just sent $5-10/mo donation to Wikimedia. If more people did this I think it would help. I find it a fair price.

Re: Stepping Down as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation

#239

Post by jjk166 »

will4274 wrote: post #236
jjk166 wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the article for John Wilkes Booth describes him as an "American stage actor" even though that's not what he's known for. If you keep reading the article, however, it's almost completely about what he is known for (a statement true for both cases). That's just standard wikipedia formatting.

I think, if you looked a bit closer, you'd find that Wikipedia is more opinionated about certain topics than others. On Wikipedia, Ted Kaczynski is a domestic terrorist first, and a mathematician second, but Bill Ayers is an education theorist first, and a domestic terrorist second. I don't really see any "standard" here. To my eyes, the bias is fairly consistent - somewhat left of American center plus a little bit o…

He was part of the weather underground years ago, he has spent decades as an education theorist since then. Education theorist is his current profession. Ted Kaczynski abandoned his mathematics career in 1969 when he was 27, and has spent the past 40 years either bombing people or serving time for doing so.

Similarly, Donald Trump is described as an American politician and the 45th president in his opening sentence, with discussion of his past in business and as a media personality reserved for later in the article. The standard wikipedia introduction is to list common aliases, nationality, and their current/last profession.

I will also note that on my mobile device if you google Bill Ayers, the first two sentences of his wikipedia article come up. The entire second sentence is about his involvement in the Weather Underground.

Re: Stepping Down as CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation

#240

Post by amanaplanacanal »

will4274 wrote: post #236
jjk166 wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the article for John Wilkes Booth describes him as an "American stage actor" even though that's not what he's known for. If you keep reading the article, however, it's almost completely about what he is known for (a statement true for both cases). That's just standard wikipedia formatting.

I think, if you looked a bit closer, you'd find that Wikipedia is more opinionated about certain topics than others. On Wikipedia, Ted Kaczynski is a domestic terrorist first, and a mathematician second, but Bill Ayers is an education theorist first, and a domestic terrorist second. I don't really see any "standard" here. To my eyes, the bias is fairly consistent - somewhat left of American center plus a little bit o…

That seems to be a problem with Google as much as Wikipedia.
Post reply on HN