[flagged]
Wikipedia's purpose is freedom of information , not freedom of speech . The two are cousins at best.
[flagged]
Wikimedia Russia has been dissolved
41–50 of 57 posts
Re: Wikimedia Russia has been dissolved
#42Russian Wikipedia will continue without the Wikimedia chapter, for clarity. It's not going offline.
Of course they will. They are busy rewriting history under Kremlin directives.
Who are "they"? It's still the same website on the same wikipedia domain, owned and hosted by the same global Wikimedia Foundation, with the same editors, roles and permissions.
P.S. Kinda funny how the narrative of "THEY are rewriting history" is now present in both opposing blocks. These are truly the end times of objectivity and pluralism.
Re: Wikimedia Russia has been dissolved
#43Good start, now do the rest and wikipedia will be better off.
Re: Wikimedia Russia has been dissolved
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
Still, free speech is what allows such a project. And Wikipedia also explains philosophical opinions, political positions, NSFW concepts, etc., which is only possible to that extent due to free speech. So I would disagree both that Wikipedia has nothing to do with free speech, and that it’s not about anybody’s opinions or ideas.
There was a far more productive reading you could have taken. Free speech allows Wikipedia to publish unpopular or controversial speech, but that's not the same as having an editorial policy that contributors are allowed to express themselves on the platform, which would obviously be inappropriate. Wikipedia documents opinions and ideologies but that's not the same as supporting the expression of the opinions and ide…
> There was a far more productive reading you could have taken.
As an individual, sure. But it's still a massively "go to" source of facts for billions of people.
> Free speech allows Wikipedia to publish unpopular or controversial speech
Do you really feel like Wikipedia has unpopular opinions? My impression is kinda opposite.
> Wikipedia documents opinions and ideologies
It would have been awesome if it was actually plural.
Re: Wikimedia Russia has been dissolved
#45Russian Wikipedia will continue without the Wikimedia chapter, for clarity. It's not going offline.
Of course they will. They are busy rewriting history under Kremlin directives.
I think you're misreading the situation rather dramatically here.
Wikimedia Russia was an outreach organization; their role was primarily to run local conferences and fundraise. Its closure has no impact on the operations and policies of the Russian Wikipedia and other localized projects -- which are, in any event, focused on the language, not the country. (By way of analogy, notice that the Chinese Wikipedia is still operational, despite the site having been blocked in mainland China nearly since its inception.)
Re: Wikimedia Russia has been dissolved
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
There was a far more productive reading you could have taken. Free speech allows Wikipedia to publish unpopular or controversial speech, but that's not the same as having an editorial policy that contributors are allowed to express themselves on the platform, which would obviously be inappropriate. Wikipedia documents opinions and ideologies but that's not the same as supporting the expression of the opinions and ide…
> There was a far more productive reading you could have taken. As an individual, sure. But it's still a massively "go to" source of facts for billions of people. > Free speech allows Wikipedia to publish unpopular or controversial speech Do you really feel like Wikipedia has unpopular opinions? My impression is kinda opposite. > Wikipedia documents opinions and ideologies It would have been awesome if it was actuall…
I'm _not_ claiming that Wikipedia has or doesn't have unpopular opinions. I'm making a distinction between the legal framework in which Wikipedia exists (they _can_ publish unpopular or controversial speech) and what Wikipedia does (they intend not to express their own opinions at all; whether you believe they succeed is immaterial).
OP was conflating the two, but Wikipedia has no obligation or principle to be a platform for free speech. It's completely irrelevant.
Re: Wikimedia Russia has been dissolved
#47[dead]
Re: Wikimedia Russia has been dissolved
#48Ironically Wikipedia is practicing the worst form of censorship itself.
Re: Wikimedia Russia has been dissolved
#49Russian Wikipedia will continue without the Wikimedia chapter, for clarity. It's not going offline.
Worth noting that "Russian Wikipedia" here is "Wikipedia in the Russian language", not "Wikipedia of the country of Russia". There is no country specific Wikipedia, just different languages.
Re: Wikimedia Russia has been dissolved
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course they will. They are busy rewriting history under Kremlin directives.
Who are "they"? It's still the same website on the same wikipedia domain, owned and hosted by the same global Wikimedia Foundation, with the same editors, roles and permissions. P.S. Kinda funny how the narrative of "THEY are rewriting history" is now present in both opposing blocks. These are truly the end times of objectivity and pluralism.
People writing and moderating Ru Wikipedia. Go check yourself, with a Google translate for example. Their pettiness know no bounds, see articles on the Kievan Rus (they even tried to rename it a few times), downing of MH17 Boeing, Russian invasion and occupation of Georgia, Russian invasion and occupation of Ukraine since Feb 2014, basically anything touching history and politics. It is quite clear that Ru Wikipedia is a state sanctioned and controlled operation.