BrainInABox comments on Wikipedia founder Jimbo Wales has entered the Talk page for the Gaza genocide article and says in his opinion calling it genocide is a violation of NPOV (Wikipedia's "neutral point of view" policy)

Wikipedia founder Jimbo Wales has entered the Talk page for the Gaza genocide article and says in his opinion calling it genocide is a violation of NPOV (Wikipedia's "neutral point of view" policy) (en.wikipedia.org)

submitted 9 months ago by cypherpunks@lemmy.ml to c/palestine@lemmy.ml

50 comments fedilink hide all child comments

For those unfamiliar with wikipedia processes, tldr talk pages are where discussion about articles happens. See Help:Talk pages for details.

Link goes to the talk page as of the currently-latest edit by Jimbo; here is the diff showing other edits to it since then.

see also:

the current latest version of the article itself, as of today (last edit was four days ago): https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gaza_genocide&oldid=1319572343
all edits by Jimbo: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Jimbo_Wales

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 0 points 9 months ago (1 child)

Yeah, I'm sure the elites are terrified at you having access to articles overwhelmingly written by western libertarians that happily and frequently source right wing pundits.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Miro_Collas@masto.ai 3 points 9 months ago (1 child)

@BrainInABox Left AND right wing "pundits" are frequently cited. Sometimes there are editing "wars" where the two sides erase each other's edits, but those are swiftly stopped and the issue is debated until a neutral consensus emerges.

The right detest wikipedia because their lies are removed, so they created grokipedia. Some of the left hate it for the same reason. Bizarre

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 2 points 9 months ago (1 child)

Right wing pundits are cited overwhelmingly more and given vastly more wait, often being treated as reliable and undisputed sources of truth. If you look at the largest sources of pro-Isreal propaganda over the last two years, there's a good chance you'll find them on Wikipedia's trusted source list.

those are swiftly stopped and the issue is debated until a neutral consensus emerges.

No, what happens is that one side locks down the discussion, reverts all changes, refuses to debate in good faith, calls in sympathetic admins to discipline their opponents, locks the page, and, from personal experience, begins making organised attempts to dox dissenters. This is why dogshit right wing pundits like Anne Applebaum, and literal CIA propaganda outlets like Radio Free Asia, remain up as "reliable" sources permanently.