How Will Wikipedia Navigate the Trump Era? Inverse One year ago, the Wikimedia Foundation announced the Wikimedia Endowment, a rainy-day fund meant to ensure the continued well-being of Wikipedia. The foundation set an aggressive goal: $100 million raised over 10 years. The idea, according to ... |
Visit link:
How Will Wikipedia Navigate the Trump Era? - Inverse
Take a break from worrying about cyber bullying and whose life matters and whether or not Donald Trump likes golden showers. Check out List Of War And Anthrogenic Disaster By Death Toll on Wikipedia. Many men like to study wars and warfare and consume fiction and video games related to men killing other men, women and children. It is all quite fascinating, isnt it?
So, is Social Darwinism and other names for the belief that it is the duty of smart powerful people to rid the planet of everybody else. What do you think? Is it the duty of smart powerful people to over time rid the planet of everyone else? Many men will enjoy pondering this question.
Most men will feel good that they arent planning on hurting anyone. A very small number of powerful elite men, have other plans and are enjoying the experience a great deal.
__
Photo credit:Getty Images
David S. Shaw is a clinical social worker who has specialized in the treatment of men with substance abuse disorders and maintains an interest in Mens issues in general. He has particular interest in issues related to male sexuality, Pro-feminism, countering rape culture and the socialization of boys. He lives in the Catskill Mountain region of New York State.
See the original post here:
List of Wars and Anthrogenic Disaster by Death Toll as Per Wikipedia. A Break From Pondering Surface News. - The Good Men Project (blog)
Digital despots of Wikipedia guard pages and routinely censor opposing viewpoints
BombThrowers Wikipedia, the open-source online encyclopedia of everything, has deemed The Peoples Cube website by political satirist Oleg Atbashian too non-notable to be counted as a part of everything anymore.
Last week, they purged the Cubes Wikipedia entry.
How does Wikipedia make such judgment calls? Not by using amateur stuff like algorithms. Or, math.
Instead, they allow gangs of politically motivated computer geeks to descend on a wiki page they are targeting for destruction and harass the other contributors until everyone sane leaves the room. Then they vandalize the text into incoherence; claim they have subjected it to a rigorous process of collaborative editing, and recommend that it be purged.
Such behavior is the computer-programming version of anarchist stunts with names like participism, sociocracy, or consensus-based decision-making. In other words, its like when the lunatics of Occupy Wall Street took a break from defecating on police cruisers and crouched on street corners twinkling their fingers up and down until a critical mass twinkled in unison that they wanted to order pizza, or purge all the white men, or ask Katie Couric if they could use the Today Show bathrooms again.
Its probably more or less the same people, too.
Wouldnt it be far more ethical for the mandarins of Wikipedia to acknowledge that they removed The Peoples Cube entry because they dont like Atbashians brand of politics? Of course, doing so would force them to acknowledge that they censor content politically, which wouldnt sit well with Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales carefully curated public image as the rare Internet mogul who defends Internet freedom even when it puts him at odds with Communist Chinese officials.
Thus the tap dance of collaborative editing and the pseudo-scientific finding of insufficient notability.
What, one might ask, is the basis for Wikipedias measurement of notability? For a political comedy website like The Peoples Cube (website link), audience share seems an obvious choice. And here, the Wikipedia folks have no argument. According to Ranking.com, The Peoples Cube is the 28,724th most visited website. That certainly makes The Peoples Cube seem a tad obscureuntil one looks at other political comedy websites that are not considered too obscure to have their own Wikipedia pages.
The (terribly unfunny) left-wing political comedy website Daily Howler is ranked the 287,343rd most popular website, yet it has a Wikipedia page.
Free Wood Post, ranked as the 146,176th most popular website, not only has a Wikipedia page but is also included on Wikipedias List of Satirical New Websites.
I could go on, but left-wing political humor is pretty thin on the web. Perhaps thats why Wikipedia unleashed its editorial mob to break some knee-caps over at The Peoples Cube.
Excerpt from:
Why did Wikipedia purge The People's Cube? - Canada Free Press
It's the type ofauthoritarian overkillrenownedsatirist Oleg Atbashian has been spoofing at his blog The People's Cube for years. For some nefarious reason, after about nine years of existence, the leftists atWikipedia have have decided to completely scrub The People's Cube entry from Wikipedia.
"Congratulations, comrades. We are now officially a non-site populated by non-persons sharing non-thoughts and making non-jokes," Atbashian wrote in a post at The People's Cube "It makes me feel right at home, back in the Soviet Union, where an invisible hand obstructed any of my efforts to manifest my existence. How liberating. No visibility means no responsibility. Out of sight, out of mind."
Atbashian suspects that the purge may be related to his arrest atGeorge Mason University(GMU)last November.
The conservative satirist was arrested and released on $8,000 bail for putting up pro-Israel posters to combat an upcoming pro-Islamist conference at GMU. He now faces the prospect of five years in prison for allegedly committing a"class 6 felony."
"Back in my Soviet dissident days, when I was collecting signatures in defense of Andrei Sakharov, I was screamed at, threatened, and lectured by the KGB and Communist functionaries," Oleg said at the time. "What I never imagined was that in the United States, the land of the free, I would not only be subjected to similar treatment, but go to jail."
The hearing has been set for February 14, 2017.
"Removing all information about me and my projects from history will definitely diminish my notability and visibility before the hearing," Atbashian told PJ Media. "One of the first things they did was they added the GMU controversy to our Wikipedia page, and then little by little they removed everything else from the page as irrelevant, and after that they voted to delete the page altogether as lacking notability."
"The Left has become more militant than ever," Atbashian wrote in his post at The People's Cube:
In other words, their excuses kept changing while the goal to do us harm remained the main focus. It's similar to how the Soviet media treated Solzhenitsyn, turning him into an non-person. If Wikipedia existed back then, these guys would have rephrased and deleted everything on Solzhenitsyn's page, reducing it to one line: "Ex-convict, traitor to the Motherland, wrote anti-communist lies." And then, because it failed to establish notability, they would have deleted the page altogether.
Follow this link:
The People's Cube Purged from Wikipedia - PJ Media
Subscribe to Loudwire on
Its Wikipedia: Fact or Fiction? time! In this edition of our signature segment, we got Al Barr and Ken Casey of Dropkick Murphys to prove and disprove whats written about them on Wikipedia.
Having pioneered celtic punk for over 20 years, Dropkick Murphys are one of the most beloved bands in recent memory. Theres plenty of incredible moments in those 20 years, so we wanted to know which ones documented on Wikipedia are true.
Ken Casey loved that Wikipedia wrote that Al Barr was jealous of the Murphys success while he was singing for The Bruisers. But is the claim true? Youll find out above. You also hear about when Barr got the call to come down and sing for Dropkick Murphys, getting stoned and convincing himself that he couldnt possibly sing the tracks.
Wikipedia also claims that Dropkick Murphys were surprised at first that Irish influence crept into their music, further stating they werent too pleased with the realization. Casey reveals whether this is true or false and how he wrote Dropkick Murphys first-ever track, Barroom Hero.
Check out the Dropkick Murphys edition of Wikipedia: Fact or Fiction? above! The bands newest album, 11 Short Stories of Pain and Glory, is available now, so click here and grab a copy!
Watch More Episodes of Wikipedia: Fact or Fiction?
Dropkick Murphys Want Your 'Blood,' Announce New Album + 2017 U.S. Tour
See more here:
Dropkick Murphys Play 'Wikipedia: Fact or Fiction?' - Loudwire - Loudwire