Jump to content

Talk:Criticism of Wikipedia

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeCriticism of Wikipedia was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 23, 2004Articles for deletionNo consensus
March 13, 2005Articles for deletionKept
October 18, 2005Articles for deletionSpeedily kept
December 10, 2005Articles for deletionKept
December 13, 2006Articles for deletionKept
August 6, 2008Articles for deletionSpeedily kept
April 1, 2022Articles for deletionKept
August 10, 2023Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Former good article nominee

Pro-forma COI declaration

[edit]

Since many critics of Wikipediocracy act as though they are members of a cult, bending WP site rules to advance their objectives, I will note here that I replaced a 404ed link for a permalink to a Wikipediocracy external link. I am a registered user and regular participant of that site but have no formal connection to its ownership or management, nor a financial connection of any sort. Derp derp. —Tim Davenport /// Carrite (talk) 18:06, 5 November 2024 (UTC) /// "Randy from Boise" on WPO[reply]

Well the ARE a cult, as evident by them removing Newsweek from reliable sources, which is middle of the road, and adding Vox, which is far left with a long list of bad articles and few retractions 76.150.163.26 (talk) 22:31, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Antisemitism section

[edit]

This new section contains:

However, as early as 2010, one study found that antisemitic bias occurred through "a systematic use of criticism elimination", which refers to the ability of Wikipedia editors to prevent criticism of organizations that deploy antisemitic discourse.

This is sourced to:

Oboler, Andre; Steinberg, Gerald; Stern, Rephael (October 11, 2010). "The Framing of Political NGOs in Wikipedia through Criticism Elimination". Journal of Information Technology & Politics. 7 (4): 284–299. doi:10.1080/19331680903577822. ISSN 1933-1681.

And that is a touch ironic, because in discussing a case study regarding editing of the War on Want article for criticism elimination, the writers describe an edit and says,

This is a sophisticated edit that alters the public record in Wikipedia through selection and misrepresentation of an alternative source.

Now that source does contain case studies regarding antisemitism, yes, but the paper is not about antisemitism. It is about critcism elimination of NGOs, and so when it speaks of "a systematic use of criticism elimination", it is saying something about how editors edit Wikipedia, yes, but it is not specifically talking about antisemitism. Antisemitism forms part of two of the case studies, but the criticism of Wikipedia here is that editors can take sources and misrepresent them to make the points those editors want to make. Which is exactly what we are doing here by including this in our antisemitism section. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 12:14, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have attempted to reword the text in question here. It seems to me it wasn't inaccurate, per se, but I take your point.
The key points seem to be:
  • There's systematic removal of criticism of NGOs
  • Two instances of such removal included NGOs accused of antisemitism or an anti-Israel bias
  • The latter is a subset of the former, but not the whole of it.
I hope it's clearer now. Lewisguile (talk) 12:46, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hardly an unbiased set of authors! Oh well I suppose criticism of them would be a fourth level criticism I think, I'm fairly happy though to have all and sundry criticism of Wikipedia in this article wherever it comes from! NadVolum (talk) 16:22, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Why Wikipedia Is Not So Great" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

The redirect Why Wikipedia Is Not So Great has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 14 § Why Wikipedia Is Not So Great until a consensus is reached. Anonymous 23:25, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Why Wikipedia Sucks" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

The redirect Why Wikipedia Sucks has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 11 § Why Wikipedia Sucks until a consensus is reached. — Anonymous 20:22, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Opera

[edit]

Opera — Preceding unsigned comment added by 102.208.97.251 (talk) 22:33, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Co-Founder critizises site

[edit]

https://harbingersdaily.com/wikipedia-co-founder-criticizes-site-says-it-has-slid-into-leftist-propaganda/

Wikipedia Co-Founder Criticizes Site, Says It Has Slid Into ‘Leftist Propaganda’

Wikipedia has in recent years drifted away from neutrality and slid into “leftist propaganda,” according to its co-founder Larry Sanger. 2.242.67.90 (talk) 20:32, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing new here; it's been Sanger's sole note for the last decade or so, see his article. Sanger is also copiously cited already in this article. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 06:22, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Also, kudos for presenting a "news" source that feels compelled to end each piece with several Bible quotes that demonstrate how close we are to the End Times... --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 06:25, 18 February 2025 (UTC))[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Criticism_of_Wikipedia&oldid=1276332182"