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

Wikipedia cofounder Larry Sanger blocked from editing Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 259 posts

Re: Wikipedia cofounder Larry Sanger blocked from editing Wikipedia

#231

Post by gaiagraphia »

lambdaone wrote: post #172
gaiagraphia wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Always thought the dencrentalisation and forking of Wikipedia would be the endgame. Would allow for people to actually curate their own spaces again. Wikipedia is a great project, but I feel it's basically complete, and is technically limited. Half the references are dead or paywalled, so it's impossible to actually read more about anything. I'm sure AI would effectively be able to recreate webs of knowledge. Indexin…

> Always thought the dencrentalisation and forking of Wikipedia would be the endgame. Would allow for people to actually curate their own spaces again. Database dumps and software for the entire enyclopedia are avaible for free, and multiple forks already exist, including two which are run on behalf of the Russian and Chinese governments. You are, and have always been, more than welcome to create your own.

I didn't argue against it though, did I? Read again.

Re: Wikipedia cofounder Larry Sanger blocked from editing Wikipedia

#232

Post by bit-anarchist »

vrganj wrote: post #229
bit-anarchist wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read it. In my second reading, I found nothing that contradict the first point, and that address the second point. If you found otherwise, could you cite the relevant sections?

Sure, I feel like both of your points are addressed by the first paragraph already: > Jewish Bolshevism, also Judeo–Bolshevism, is an antisemitic, anti-communist conspiracy theory, and myth[2] that claims that a Jewish conspiracy was behind the Russian Revolution of 1917, controlled the Soviet Union and international communist movements, and had a secret plan to control or destroy Western civilization; or, more gener…

As the citation says, it was one of the main beliefs that justified the invasion and the Holocaust. Even if Jewish Bolshevism wasn't a thing (which could happen, if Jews didn't get better representation in the USSR in comparison to the Empire), Nazis would still commit the holocaust, invade the USSR, and, most importantly, still exist, thus, it can't be called a key pillar of Nazism. It's more accurately described as a key pillar of Nazi propaganda, supported here:

> Michael Kellogg in his Ph.D. thesis argued that the racist ideology of Nazis was to a significant extent influenced by White émigrés in Germany, [...]

p.s. Kellogg is mentioned below to argue that this was the origin of Hitler's antisemitism, but that is contested, and there's plenty of evidence of Hitler antisemitism from early on. Still, Jewish Bolshevism is well accepted as a key propaganda element.

Moving to the second point, I don't see how your citation address it. "Cultural Marxism" is primarily spoken without referring to religion. Unlike Cultural Bolshevism, there's no modern equivalent to Jewish Bolshevism, and, as I stated previously, the ones who primarily talk about Cultural Marxism don't even mention religion, and if they do, they often treat Judaism and Christianity as if they are in the same boat. If anything, the closest religious scapegoats would be Muslims, but they aren't treated as "masterminds". Don't even get started on race (which is what Nazis actually cared about).

Re: Wikipedia cofounder Larry Sanger blocked from editing Wikipedia

#233

Post by naturalmovement »

thiht wrote: post #211
afh1 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, banned by the status quo for trying to disturb it. Wikipedia is nowadays highly politicized and more time and energy are spent on politics than on actually contributing with any useful knowledge. I've stopped contributing years ago after a decade of writing because of how bad things had gotten. It's a lost battle, all that remains is scorched earth filled with toxic editors trying to push their POV and banning e…

I’ll keep the status quo of rejecting MAGA lies over allowing Fox News as a reliable source any day Go use conservapedia or grokpedia if you want the lies, no one is forcing you to use Wikipedia, and no one is asking for it to be turned into shit like everything the alt right touches

[flagged]

Re: Wikipedia cofounder Larry Sanger blocked from editing Wikipedia

#234

Post by bit-anarchist »

bit-anarchist wrote: post #232
vrganj wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, I feel like both of your points are addressed by the first paragraph already: > Jewish Bolshevism, also Judeo–Bolshevism, is an antisemitic, anti-communist conspiracy theory, and myth[2] that claims that a Jewish conspiracy was behind the Russian Revolution of 1917, controlled the Soviet Union and international communist movements, and had a secret plan to control or destroy Western civilization; or, more gener…

As the citation says, it was one of the main beliefs that justified the invasion and the Holocaust . Even if Jewish Bolshevism wasn't a thing (which could happen, if Jews didn't get better representation in the USSR in comparison to the Empire), Nazis would still commit the holocaust, invade the USSR, and, most importantly, still exist, thus, it can't be called a key pillar of Nazism. It's more accurately described a…

Rereading this comment, I realized I made a jump withe white émigrés bit. The idea is that they would form a significant support base of Nazi Germany, but weren't as central to the philosophy of Hitler's ideology as suggested.

I also recognize that I did claim that Jewish Bolshevism wasn't the justification for the mass murders. I still maintain that, for I meant the main primary ideological reason why the Nazis did it. Without the racial supremacy (specially without the theories about Hebrew degeneracy) and ultra-traditionalism of Nazism, Jewish Bolshevism wouldn't even be conceived.

Re: Wikipedia cofounder Larry Sanger blocked from editing Wikipedia

#235

Post by tim333 »

panny wrote: post #181

[flagged]

If you click the link on that where it says "discuss" to the right of "Iranian victory" there's quite a lot of open discussion on whether to say won or inconclusive, with about 2/3 of people going for won.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2026_Iran_war#Iranian_Vic...

I think quite a lot of people calling it biased don't really understand how it works - mostly by that sort of vote amongst the kind of people who went to university so I guess left of the Republican party but not too bad.

Not sure how you'd improve it except maybe a Ground News kind of approach of having two views - right wing sources say, left wing say. But then many controversies don't neatly split left-right.

Also it's not that locked. I could edit it for example - you need to have 500 edits. And I think anyone can chip in on the "discuss" bit.

Re: Wikipedia cofounder Larry Sanger blocked from editing Wikipedia

#236

Post by thiht »

naturalmovement wrote: post #233
thiht wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ll keep the status quo of rejecting MAGA lies over allowing Fox News as a reliable source any day Go use conservapedia or grokpedia if you want the lies, no one is forcing you to use Wikipedia, and no one is asking for it to be turned into shit like everything the alt right touches

[flagged]

Not sure why?

Re: Wikipedia cofounder Larry Sanger blocked from editing Wikipedia

#237

Post by peppersghost93 »

dotancohen wrote: post #230
peppersghost93 wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For many topics right wing ideas are just factually incorrect. This isn't Wikipedia's fault.

[flagged]

Going to have to disagree with the established science bit, and the left has a long history in western culture. You just don't like it lol

Re: Wikipedia cofounder Larry Sanger blocked from editing Wikipedia

#238

Post by FireBeyond »

Aatube wrote: post #225
FireBeyond wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, try to make any substantive change on many pages and you'll get met with a barrage of "WP:OR! WP:POV! WP:NPS! WP:WTF!" and don't fall into the amateur trap (that certain editors hope you will) of reverting their reversion. They'll look to get you blocked for a revert war. "What should I do then?" "You should respond to my comments on the Talk page for why I reverted you." "But you haven't made any comments on t…

For a few years now Wikipedia has had a mentorship feature where every new user can ask an experienced user for help through the homepage. They usually come through and help you go through the alphabet soup. > "But you haven't made any comments on the Talk page about that." Well then, make that comment yourself and you can go ahead and revert it later if the other person does not respond.

Or, eventually, as a user who had nearly 2,000 contributions over 10+ years, you finally say "Why even bother?" and just leave the project, like I did.

Re: Wikipedia cofounder Larry Sanger blocked from editing Wikipedia

#239

Post by ImPostingOnHN »

MichaelZuo wrote: post #198
Kim_Bruning wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, sure, it looks like one thing, but ... I took a quick look at what the "Wikiproject intellectual diversity" was actually monitoring. Specific articles or categories about things Mr Sanger finds interesting,right? Well, indeed: specifically it's all arbcom, admin elections, policy pages. You can check it out here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Larry_Sanger/WikiProject_... Then he canvassed people from outsi…

This doesnt make sense… ? Clearly all significant names involved with Wikipedia, including admins, have some kind of ulterior motives, to some degree above literally zero. Unless you believe in literally perfect altruism 100% of the time. The degree can vary from one to another, but that seems like a much higher bar to confidently pin down.

You aren't allowed to build a live feed of wikipedia administrative actions that run counter to your political biases, so that you can coordinate a brigade of people who share your political biases.

Re: Wikipedia cofounder Larry Sanger blocked from editing Wikipedia

#240

Post by ImPostingOnHN »

SanjayMehta wrote: post #121
ieie3366 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the worst is the cycle: 1. There is incorrect information on wikipedia. 2. Legacy news publishes an article, using wikipedia as source (of course). 3. Now the incorrect information is essentially canonized

Circular references. This methodology has been called out by several researchers. NYT, WaPo are key users of this technique. Off the top of my head: https://citationintegrity.org/ Wikipedia features prominently as a defaulter.

I don't know that some dude's blog is an accurate judge of the listed entities
Post reply on HN