Mediaboss Marketing

Steven Pruitt, the Virginia resident who has made over 3 million edits on Wikipedia.

For every article that you read on Wikipedia, there is a writer and an editor. A towering figure among them is Steven Pruitt, the Virginia resident who has made over three million edits on the "free encyclopedia".

Mr Pruitt made the news back in 2017 when TimeMagazine named him one of the 25 most influential people on the internet, alongside former US President Donald Trump, JK Rowling and Kim Kardashian. Since 2006, he has made over three million Wikipedia edits, more than any other English-language editor. He has personally also written hundreds of new articles on influential women in order to correct Wikipedia's gender imbalance and also strengthen the backbone of the platform itself.

Wikipedia is such an incredible tool because it makes so much information accessible to so many people at once, he told Time.

Mr Pruitt was named one of the most influential people on the internet in part because one-third of all English language articles in the online encyclopedia have been edited by him. He goes by the name Ser Amantio di Nicolao on Wikipedia, the name of his favourite Opera character. In an interview with CBS News, Mr Pruitt revealed that he is deeply obsessed with historyand his first article was about Peter Francisco, who was his great great great great great great grandfather.

Mr Pruitt's primary profession is at the US Customs Office, where he organises documents. However, in the evening, after completing his duties, he spends more than three hours a day researching, editing and writing for the online portal. He doesn't receive any compensation for his work, but he has remained true to his interests.

"The idea of making it all free fascinates me. My mother grew up in the Soviet Union... So I'm very conscious of that -what it can mean to make knowledge free, to make information free," he said.

Further, speaking to CBS News, Mr Pruitt revealed that the longest he has gone without editing Wikipedia is two or three weeks. In fact, WikiMedia's vice president of communications, Kui Kinyanjui, had also stated that the site would not exist without the dedication of its volunteers, especially Steven Pruitt.

We're very excited about projects like Women in Red, which seeks to identify and place more content on women on our platform... Steven has been a large contributor to that project," Kui Kinyanjui said.

Several of the other top 10 Wikipedia editors also agree that Mr Pruitt's contributions have been remarkable.He is notable not just for the sheer number of articles and edits he has contributed, but for what he chooses to highlight as well. For example, he learned that women were the subjects of just 15 per cent of biographical articles on the site, and worked to fix that imbalance by writing hundreds of articles about influential women.

To put into perspective what it took for Mr Pruitt to become the top editor, he has been dedicating his free time to the site for more than 13 years now.

Waiting for response to load...

See more here:
Steven Pruitt, The Man Who Has Freely Edited Over 3 Million Articles On Wikipedia - NDTV

Squaring up to the prospect of a new Red Hot Chili Peppers album, Im reminded of a vintage quote by Nick Cave: Im forever near a stereo saying, What is this garbage? And the answer is always the Red Hot Chili Peppers. I can empathise. I dont habitually harbour animus against artists I dislike, but something about the sheer scale of the Red Hot Chili Peppers awfulness has always felt weirdly personal.

Despite the kind of success that looks mightily impressive in a Wikipedia stat dump 100 million record sales, multiple Grammy wins, numerous number ones the Californian rock band have always been tricky to tolerate, let alone love. The reasons for this are manifold. Their grimly juvenile take on sexual relations envelops their music in a cloud of toxic testosterone. One song is called Hump de Bump, another Party on Your Pussy. They have an album titled The Uplift Mofo Party Plan. They became notorious for wearing sports socks over their genitals and depicting Californian frat-boy shenanigans with all the reverence of Homer contemplating the Elysian Plains. When they on occasion turn their attention to matters of spirituality, the lyrical wisdom has the depth and nuance of an Insta meme.

The music? The music is an ugly Frankensteins monster constructed from all the least likeable, least groovy bits of rock, funk, psychedelia and hip hop, with an added patina of plain stupidity. Singer Anthony Kiedis radiates the kind of braggadocious bro vibes that, aurally speaking, make me want to cross the road for my own safety. Kiedis writes terrible lyrics, flatlining melodies and has a horrible shouty voice. It goes without saying that he possesses the kind of swaggering confidence inversely proportional to all these impediments. Do the sums and you could reasonably claim that Red Hot Chili Peppers have waged a 40-year campaign of brute bone-headed idiocy upon the world and yet somehow emerged triumphant.

I have been a little luckier than Cave of late. Since the 1990s, when the three albums on which the bands success rests Blood Sugar Sex Magik; One Hot Minute; Californication were ubiquitous, Ive managed to more or less avoid their music. A reckoning is long overdue. Its time to stress test my prejudices, and what better way than by listening to their new record, Unlimited Love. Produced by long-term enabler Rick Rubin, this is the bands first album since 2016, and their first with original guitarist John Frusciante for almost 20 years.

Per the title, Red Hot Chili Peppers are blessing us with 17 new songs almost 75 minutes of music. This is, by some degree, too much love. The worst and sadly most prevalent kind of Red Hot Chili Peppers song is a doggedly unmelodic, squelchy faux-funk thing garnished with a half-rapped torrent of vaguely unseemly doggerel. There are several examples of this form on Unlimited Love Shes a Lover; Whatchu Thinkin; One Way Traffic; Let Em Cry but we shall let Poster Child speak for all of them. Imagine Billy Joels We Didnt Start the Fire if Joel had been more interested in the Thompson Twins and Caddyshack than Belgians in the Congo. Its very bad indeed.

Other diversions are simply bizarre. On the plodding, phased folk-rock pastiche Black Summer, Kiediss absurd vocal appears to be a misguided tribute to a West Country pirate. Its a song with an acute identity crisis: it thinks it is Stairway to Heaven, which is bad enough, when it is actually Spinal Tap fronted by Edward Teach.

Mercifully, Red Hot Chili Peppers have a secret weapon. Bass player Flea is a world-class musician who over the years has negotiated a series of day-release deals in order to play with grown-ups such as Thom Yorke. His contributions dominate the best songs here. The slippery groove of Its Only Natural is genuinely terrific. The pretty The Great Apes reminds me of early REM, off-time and slightly odd. Aquatic Mouth Dance is a rhythmically interesting blend of lounge funk and blaring soul, marred only by Kiediss contribution, which can be likened to a toddler scrawling on the walls.

One other positive. Though it is far too long, sonically this isnt a fussy or overcooked record. The production is clean and punchy for the most part, and Frusciante is a powerfully succinct player, only really letting his indulgences fly on The Heavy Wing. What else? Theres a ballad that sounds like a 1980s Elton John cast-off, and an acoustic waltz called Tangelo. More than enough to conclude that Caves putdown isnt entirely fair, but its not exactly wrong, either.

Originally posted here:
The awfulness of the Red Hot Chili Peppers has always felt weirdly personal - The Spectator

A tragicomic air clings to bands who light up the sky like a firework and fade away. The Norwegian subjects of a-ha: The Movie are best known for their 1985 hit Take on Me, but, despite successful shows, seem mired in creative purgatory. Thomas Robsahm and Aslaug Holms documentary trawls the bands career with musings from its three members Paul Waaktaar-Savoy, Magne Furuholmen and the Ken Dollesque lead singer Morten Harket and key associates.

Bouncing around synth-pop-happy London in the early 1980s, the driven trio of accomplished musicians landed a contract with Warner Brothers. Take on Me, with its infectious arpeggios and liberating high notes, made them stars, boosted by a delightful part-animated music video from Steven Barron (who also made videos for Billie Jean and Money for Nothing).

Then what? The documentary reviews the bands chronology like a slavish yet intermittently lucid Wikipedia entry. We dont learn how a-ha continued to get the privilege of releasing albums (including denim and shiny-shirt phases at either end of the 1990s) or what kept thousands of fans coming back for more. But we do witness a hundred muted shades of glum and listless: Furuholmen still seems sad about abandoning guitar for keyboards, decades ago, while Harket talks about needing his space. Waaktaar-Savoys attitude can be summed up by a sticker behind him in one shot: No Stupid People.

Theres a slight wonky interest in seeing the grind of recording sessions and fan service. But the film feels promotional enough that it wont lean into the potential humor of their situation.

a-ha: The MovieNot rated. Running time: 1 hour 49 minutes. In theaters.

Read more:
a-ha: The Movie Review: The Creative Purgatory of the Take on Me Trio - The New York Times

Russia's communications regulator is threatening to fine Google and Wikipedia for not removing what it describes as misinformation about the war in Ukraine. Chris Delmas/AFP via Getty Images hide caption

Russia's communications regulator is threatening to fine Google and Wikipedia for not removing what it describes as misinformation about the war in Ukraine.

The Russian government is threatening to fine Wikipedia if it doesn't remove content that contradicts its narrative about the war in Ukraine.

Communications regulator Roskomnadzor announced on Thursday that it had asked the online encyclopedia to remove a page containing "unreliable socially significant materials, as well as other prohibited information" about its operations in Ukraine, according to an English translation. It accused the site of intentionally misinforming Russian users.

It said it could fine Wikipedia up to 4 million rubles, or nearly $47,000, for failing to remove those materials, which are illegal under Russian law.

Russia enacted legislation last month that criminalizes war reporting that doesn't echo the Kremlin's version of events including by calling it a war. The law has forced most of Russia's remaining independent news outlets to close and many journalists to leave the country for fear of facing up to 15 years in prison.

The Wikipedia page in question describes the history and context of the war, as well as specific military operations, casualties and humanitarian impact, human rights violations, legal proceedings, international reaction, economic consequences and media depictions.

It is not clear what specific details the regulator is looking to have removed, but Newsweek reports that it said on Monday that the Russian-language version of the page contained "inaccurate information about the special military operation to protect the Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics for the de-militarization and de-Nazification of Ukraine," including the use of the words war, aggression and invasion.

Roskomnadzor's announcement follows two separate warnings to the Wikimedia Foundation, which owns and operates the encyclopedia.

A spokesperson for the foundation told NPR over email that it had received demands on March 1 and again on March 29 to remove information from the Russian-language version of the page about the invasion, before learning of the possible fine.

"The Wikimedia Foundation supports everyone's fundamental right to access free, open, and verifiable information; this escalation does not change our commitment," the spokesperson said.

The information on Wikipedia is sourced and shared by volunteers, with the foundation saying last month that Ukrainian volunteers were continuing to make additions and edits to the encyclopedia even as the war on their country unfolded.

The spokesperson reiterated on Friday that the information within the article continues to be verified, fact-checked and "improved by an ever growing number of Wikipedia volunteer editors," who determine the site's content and editorial standards.

"The Wikimedia Foundation protects and will continue to protect their ability to engage in research and contribute to Wikipedia," the spokesperson added.

In a statement released after the first takedown request last month, the Wikimedia Foundation said the demand "threatened censorship," and that denying people access to reliable information at a time of crisis could have "life-altering consequences." As of March 3, they said the English-language version of the page had been viewed more than 11 million times, and articles about the war had been created in more than 99 languages.

"Wikipedia is an important source of reliable, factual information in this crisis," the foundation wrote. "In recognition of this important role, we will not back down in the face of efforts to censor and intimidate members of our movement. We stand by our mission to deliver free knowledge to the world."

Wikipedia isn't the only information platform facing such a request from Roskomnadzor. Just days ago, the agency warned it would fine Google up to 8 million rubles (more than $93,000) for not following its orders to remove YouTube videos to which it objected.

This story originally appeared on the Morning Edition live blog.

See the original post here:
Russia threatens to fine Wikipedia if it doesn't remove some details about the war - NPR

Did you know that theres a Swiss political party dedicated to opposing the use of PowerPoint? That some people believe Avril Lavigne died in 2003 and was replaced by a look-alike? Or that theres a stone in a museum in Taiwan that uncannily resembles a slab of meat?

Probably not unless, that is, youre one of the hundreds of thousands of people who follow @depthsofwikipedia. The Instagram account shares bizarre and surprising snippets from the vast, crowdsourced online encyclopedia, including amusing images (a chicken literally crossing a road) and minor moments in history (Mitt Romney driving several hours with his dog atop his car). Some posts are wholesome such as Hatsuyume, the Japanese word for ones first dream of the year while others are not safe for work (say, panda pornography).

Annie Rauwerda, 22, started the account in the early days of the pandemic, when others were baking sourdough bread and learning how to knit. Everyone was starting projects, and this was my project, she said.

At the time, she was a sophomore at the University of Michigan. Students are often discouraged from using Wikipedia as a source in academic work, because most of its pages can be edited by anyone and may contain inaccurate information. But for Ms. Rauwerda, the site was always more about entertainment: spending hours clicking on one link after another, getting lost in rabbit holes.

Wikipedia is the best thing on the internet, Ms. Rauwerda said in a phone interview. Its what the internet was supposed to be. It has this hacker ethos of working together and making something.

At first, only her friends were following the account. But it received a wave of attention when Ms. Rauwerda posted about the influencer Caroline Calloway, who was upset that the post featured an old version of her Wikipedia page that said her occupation was nothing. Ms. Rauwerda apologized, and Ms. Calloway later boosted the account on her Instagram.

Ms. Rauwerda has since expanded @depthsofwikipedia to Twitter and TikTok. She sells merchandise (such as a coffee mug emblazoned with an image from the Wikipedia entry for bisexual lighting) and has hosted a live show in Manhattan, featuring trivia and stand-up.

Her followers often pitch her Wikipedia pages to feature, but these days its hard to find an entry that will impress Ms. Rauwerda. If its a fun fact thats been on the Reddit home page, Im definitely not going to repost it, she said. For example, there are only 25 blimps in the world. Ive known about that for a long time, and it went around Twitter a couple days ago. I was shocked. I was like, Everyone knows this.

She is choosy in large part because many of her followers rely on @depthsofwikipedia for unearthing the hidden gems of the internet.

I just love to learn stuff, especially these strange photos and things I could never find on my own, said Gabe Hockett, 15, a high school student in Minneapolis. He said his favorite posts from the account include The Most Unwanted Song and the Dave Matthews Band Chicago River incident.

Jen Fox, 22, said that trading posts from the account with her boyfriend is a special, nerdy love language. Its also been a litmus test for friendships. When Ms. Fox, a copywriter, moved to San Francisco in February, she would mention the account to new people she met. If they were familiar with it, she said, we would start DM-ing each other and sharing our favorite posts, which felt like we were really solidifying a concrete friendship. Ms. Fox even attended a @depthsofwikipedia meet-up at a local brewery. Theres such a community behind it, she said.

Its not new for lovers of Wikipedia to rally around their passion for the platform. A Facebook group called Cool Freaks Wikipedia Club, founded eight years ago, has nearly 50,000 members who actively trade links.

Ms. Rauwerdas account makes the internet feel smaller, said Heather Woods, an assistant professor of rhetoric and technology at Kansas State University. It shortcuts the rabbit-hole phenomenon by offering attractive or sometimes hilariously unattractive entry points to internet culture.

Zachary McCune, the brand director for the Wikimedia Foundation, which operates Wikipedia, said that @depthsofwikipedia is an extension of the sites participatory ethos. Its a place where Wikipedia comes to life, like an after-hours tour of the best of Wikipedia, Mr. McCune said.

And because Wikipedia has more than 55 million articles, having a guide like Ms. Rauwerda is helpful. She hopes that visitors to her page walk away with new shared knowledge. I want you to see something that makes you pause and go, Hmm, thats interesting, Ms. Rauwerda said. Something that makes you rethink the world a little bit.

See original here:
Mining the Depths of Wikipedia on Instagram - The New York Times