No.1531921
>>1531904which page is that from?
No.1532031
Based OP. I had to take a break from wikipedia because of personal things and interacting with people (reactionaries) who have an autistic fascination with their beurocratic processes and the battles they can have with it was turning me into a horrible person. so yea my advice is not to interact with other wikipedia users outside of the ones you get to know positively unless you have to, i think for some people part of the strategy is to just wear other users down in to inaction, letting them 'win' by default.
>>1531900Some more points i would add to your list
>find a groups of pages that are not so active to make your own, over time people will generally defer to you on changes to the page and your changes will not be questioned>BE BOLD (of course)>join Wikiprojects, Wikiproject socialism and Wikiproject Anarchism are good, the latter is much more active with very good editors who will help and support new users.>put the thing down when people start to get annoying, always be 'polite' to people as apparently they will ban you for calling someone who is a cunt a cunt it is ridiculous but not ban you for blatant reactionary misinformation. No.1532035
Did the other thread about this disappear? It was based and really good for instapilling the kind of people who almost deny the influence of intel activity on their daily lives
No.1532375
>>1532035People were saying in the other thread that there was a thread on the same thing even before that that got deleted. So we're on thread 3 now, inderasting that mods keep deleting
No.1532380
>>1532133>People usingDamn I can't believe the Liberal Crime Squad broke into the Pentagon and shitposted on Wikipedia from their wifi
No.1532448
>>1531900this is specific, but anything about ETA is incredible biased toward the Spanish, and by that I mean that even the stupidest and most blabant conspiracy theories that blame ETA for everything are taken seriously, like the one about the 1979 fire in Hotel of Aragon or the 2004 madrid bombings
No.1532456
>>1532380people using major media outlets have employed passive voice for bourgeois propaganda, according to a new tracing program
No.1532498
>>1532488
That's not a very nice thing to say about your leader :(
No.1532501
>go to sleep>wake up to some nazi spammingLangley must be upset. this is a good sign 🙏
>>1532031dealing with wikichvds can be draining yes
>join Wikiprojectsgood idea
>>1532459good catch! also this "Michael Z" whoever he
or they is, is very active on all articles relating to Ukraine and the present war and keeps pushing blatant NATO disinformation, especially regarding Azov. they have a tendency to get very angry at anyone who slightly disagrees with them, accusing even people who agree with them of being Russian agents. perhaps it's projection?
No.1532502
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability,_not_truthsaw this referenced in a wikipedia talk page discussion recently lol. good fucking luck changing anything
No.1532527
>>1532502The leverage point is what counts as a credible source.
By the rules at least, getting all burger sources removed should be easy.
No.1532533
>>1532459did you really fire up photoshop and make this rather than pressing the revert button to his change?
This is insane anon, you realize that right?
>>1532375>inderasting that mods keep deletingThey are not you retard how have you been here this long and not understand how
image board works?
>>1532501https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Socialismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Anarchism No.1532539
>>1532527Oh my sweet summer child
No.1532562
>>1532539I did say at least by the rules.
I know I know, but that is the leverage point termite away. ;^)
>>1532035Check the archives @
https://archive.is/&
https://archive.org/?
No.1532567
>>1532565but anon one hecking source probably said so and sources can't be wrong. don't you dare point out inconsistencies in the source that would be WP:SYNTH
No.1532573
>>1532567lol, the sources isn't even an actual source, it's just the website from guardia civil claming that one of the high ranking officers that died in the fire died due to terrorism (technically it doesn't even blame ETA) when this could be everything from an intern fucking up to the guy's family trying to get terrorism benefits
No.1532578
>>1532502this just says that verifiability is necessary, but not sufficient. nothing requires that a "reliable" source be used, especially if it is untrue (read: contradicts other reliable sources). in WP's tortured logic there is also nothing wrong with using sources that are "reliably untrue". yes this is very annoying, but if enough of a stink is raised about this, especially about sources that can be demonstrated to be contradictory, then perhaps the policy will change
>>1532573bring it up in the Talk page and/or ask for arbitration maybe. clearly state that the source does not support the claim
No.1532591
>>1532565link the page anon i will help you if i can.
No.1532598
>>1532584"You can't expect the masses to understand or appreciate your real aims"
"It would be politically all wrong to tell them the truth about where you really are leading them."
Love how nobody at the NYT read this and assumed he just had to pass his peace and love message through with violent anti-semitism or some shit.
(Also here's the actual 2nd image to my first post that i failed to send.)
No.1532607
>>1532603Oh you probably should not bother anon, any article with -terrorist' in only attracts the worst people and it is not even a word we are suppose to use on wikipediia as per editorial guidelines. most of my effort on wikipedia is actually just trying to enforce this shit with brow beating and bullying.
No.1532661
>>1532607but anon if a source says that a group is terrorist then that group is terrorist unless NATO says otherwise
No.1532752
>>1532562Even assuming you somehow sneaked your way into the community marking every imperial American/Western/whatever news source as unreliable, you would have to contend with two facts:
- The site admins who have arbitration enforcement powers on contentious topics are with almost no exceptions against you, and
- The English-language academia who would theoretically take precedent in this scenario are mostly against you. (See
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Academic_bias which although an essay describes their position accurately).
No.1532758
>>1532598>has drawn controversy>allegedly>association with>controversial symbols linked to>allegations that members participatedlol
No.1532773
>>1532133Thanks, my bad. This thread will be eternal.
No.1532846
>>1532752does en:WP have some requirement of only citing English-language sources? non-English sources are used all over the place
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Academic_biasinteresting:
>The CHOPSY test>Judging from the viewpoint of an encyclopedia, scientific facts have broad mainstream scientific acceptance. If a scholarly claim is principally unworthy of being taught at Cambridge, Harvard, Oxford, Princeton, Sorbonne, and/or Yale, then it amounts to sub-standard scholarship and should be never considered a reliable source for establishing facts for Wikipedia.this provides an avenue for removing academic glow. if for example a citation is self-contradictory then it seems one could apply this
>>1532758those could potentially be WP:WEASEL and marked as such
No.1532854
>>1532661>but anon if a source says that a group is terrorist then that group is terrorist unless NATO says otherwiseNope. That is not how this works. What would be acceptable to write, perhaps would be; 'Is considered a terrorist organization by (country/organization).[citaiton]'.
No.1533175
>>1531903What's with all those stupid titles?
No.1533193
>>1533189what the hell is going on in there? bikeshedding over whether to call it CPC or CCP?
No.1533195
>>1532459Interesting. Where did you find this? Link?
No.1533212
Every glowiepedia thread I will remind them there's a wikipedia in pre-reform Belarusian (separate from the regular Belarusian wiki) that is straight up a collection of fanfic by pro-Western Belarusian opposition. For example, check out their page on Belarus itself.
https://be-tarask.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%83%D1%81%D1%8C No.1533214
>>1533212I don't know Belarusian but I know enough to tell that's the flag Belarusian reactionaries use which says a lot
No.1533218
>>1533214You can use Google translate to get the gist. Yes, that's the flag and emblem used by Belarusian opposition, not the official symbols of Belarus. The infobox literally lists Lukashenko as the "head of the Russian occupation administration". There are also a few articles about "le Soviet genocide of Belarusians" and a pretty hilarious pseudohistorical narrative about how Belarusians are the real Lithuanians who ruled the PLC (which is obviously absent from any other Wikipedia).
There is no way in hell this kind of shit would be allowed for any other country/language that the West wasn't actively trying to color revolution.
No.1533312
>>1532846>does en:WP have some requirement of only citing English-language sources? non-English sources are used all over the placeThere are some exceptions but generally there is an unwritten rule that anything non Western plus non English is suspicious. This even goes for sources that agree with the West. It's just inplicit xenophobia basically. Good luck undoing it.
No.1533386
>>1532502>verifiability, not truthTo be fair, bourgeois science can't operate in any other way. If you don't set up rules that are equally hostile to everyone's worldview you won't be able to force everyone to the table
No.1533533
>>1532565got banned for a day, the bullshit stayed removed, so victory I guess
No.1534053
>>1533533Probably banned from 3 revert per day rule, basically anti edit warring rule.
No.1534321
I found a neat forum who's whole theme is how wikipedia is shit. It covers a lot of the corruption and drama by admins and power editors there too and has some anysis of why wikipedia sucks and has gotten worse and worse over the years.
No.1534323
>>1534321I forgot to post the actual site lol
>wikipediasucks.co No.1535219
>>1534321>>1534323I remember going through this site a bit and my impression was they have such a hateboner for Wikipedia that they will take literally any political position that is convenient right this second to oppose it. Example:
Wikipedia is too imperialist, no wait they're too communist, no wait they're too anti-communist, no wait they're homophobic/transphobic/racist, no wait they're too woke.
You get the idea.
No.1535227
>>1535219critical support for wikisuck in their noble struggle
No.1535228
There is a lot of Japanese war crime denial stuff. Not NATO or whatever but yeah.
No.1536268
>>1533533>the bullshit stayed removed, so victory I guessyou are welcome. :)
He asked me my opinion so i will go and back you up today or tomorrow and hopefully it will stay, very weird edit to reach that editors conclusion seems to me to only be possible when taking in a lot of willful and unwarranted speculation and faith.
No.1537106
>>1535219These aren't inconsistent positions if you believe Wikipedia should be ideally be completely unbiased.
No.1537201
>>1537106>completely unbiasedNot possible, and anyway those were just examples. That forum is wildly hypocritical and I suspect made of assblasted autistic exiles from Wikipedia itself
No.1537230
>>1537201I agree it's not possible, hence why I said "ideally". I think only a few people there are former Wikipedians who got tired with it's bullshit. Politically they seem somewhat heterogenous.
No.1537300
>>1537230Do they get into the autistic detailing of probable CIA accounts the prior forum used to?
No.1537414
>>1537230Even if it was possible I disagree that it would be ideal. Striving for being "unbiased" is just a liberal norm. I'm biased against capitalism, and most accurate information is too.
No.1537419
>>1537414> and most accurate information is too.Then you're not biased against capitalism, you're simply unbiased and correct.
No.1537422
>>1537419Being accurate and unbiased are distinct. "Unbiased" to many people means giving "both sides" of a "debate", which is everything.
No.1537423
>>1537422Then they're morons and wrong.
No.1537425
>>1537415lol wtf why is that even on marxists.org?
>the Soviet Union is the bulwark of reaction!there's no way this "Communist Committee" isn't feds
No.1537457
>>1537425>lol wtf why is that even on marxists.org?marxists.org is a 90s trot website. They're incredibly useful as they have a lot of texts that are archived nowhere else though
No.1537515
>>1537425>>the Soviet Union is the bulwark of reaction!<hurr this must be fedz!!!t. retard who never fucking met leftists in his life before.
utter spazmode.
No.1537613
>>1537515yes, falsely equivocating between communism and Nazism is something that feds and reactionaries do
No.1537615
>>1537613Go outside. Join your local action orgs.
Meet your comrades.
It will be fun.
No.1537624
>>1537615>oh no my dumbass views have been called out>better call my interlocutor an asocial retard404 Argument Not Found
No.1537627
>>1537624Cool. Carry on living in your fantasy then i guess..
No.1539207
Russian and Belarusian Wikipedias: "Polish campaign of the Red Army"
Almost every other Wikipedia: "Soviet invasion of Poland"
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2305266#sitelinks-wikipedia No.1539653
hot tip for y'all: while pointing out that a text is Wrong is a no-no (WP:SYNTH), nothing in the rules prevents you from mentally substituting the word "wrong" with "not reliable" and saying the latter. this works because WP can't seem to nail down what reliability is
another pattern of glow are opinion pieces used as sources. this is so common that WP:RSOPINION has been created, and that can be one way to counter tabloid-tier sources. if an article says some BS with say a The Economist opinion piece as source presented as if it were academic consensus, simply remove it and refer to WP:RSOPINION saying that opinion pieces may not be presented as fact. it can still be re-added, but then the opinion must be couched in appropriate language, which can in some cases be removed as WP:WEASEL
peer reviewed journals are typically reliable. but some let porkoid BS through. in that case point out that reliability is a necessary but not sufficient criteria
No.1542150
I’d love to contribute to fighting back against glowiepedia, but my IP is banned for another 2 years and all VPNs are seemingly blocked from making accounts and editing on that hellscape.
No.1542250
>>1537613he's basically just telling you that burger radlibs who join CPUSA say dumb shit like USSR was reactionary
No.1547927
>>1542150Why were you banned.
No.1547934
>>1542150Maybe there's public hotspots nearby to use.
Or a comrade that doesn't do wikipedia could set up a VPN exit to use. Might make a good /tech/ initiative, if people aren't too worried about pairing IPs with internet anons
No.1548114
>>1542150>my IP is banned for another 2 yearshow
No.1549958
>>1549957now post the results on the pages of holodomor, katyn, molotov-ribbentrop and
"soviet empire""im curious
No.1549966
>>1549958I took these screenies in June of last year and the browser plugin broke since then. I'll try to get it to work again eventually
No.1550122
> In 1976, Richard Pipes headed Team B, a team of analysts organized by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) who analyzed the strategic capacities and goals of the Soviet military and political leadership. Pipes is the father of American historian Daniel Pipesholy fucking kek,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Leninctrl+f pipes on this page, you won't be disappointed.
No.1550257
>>1549969>1776 pages in 17 yearsthat's two pages every week. for nearly two decades. I struggled and failed to add a single page on a narrow topic over the course of months
>>1549982re-add it
>>1550122>>1550127happy to see I'm not the only person to have
noticed Pipes
No.1550295
>>1549969this Michael Z user is even more interesting, having created nearly
one page per day for 19 years. they also talk as if coordinating with certain other accounts off-site. plus the Langley IP mentioned in here already. they're active on nearly every single page relating to eastern europe and the soviet union
if we look more closely at what types of pages they've created and when, we see something interesting:
https://xtools.wmcloud.org/pages/en.wikipedia.org/Mzajacmost of their activity is 2004-2008. then there is a slow period up until 2020 when they pick up steam, especially after the outbreak of the present war
No.1552548
shoutout to the editor trying to talk sense into wikilibs in the article claiming the DPRK's 3 generations punishment is real:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaechon_internment_campthe articles cites known liar Shin Dong-hyuk and (of course) Radio Free Asia
No.1553653
>>1550122From the Wikipedia page
>Although lacking proof, biographers and historians like Richard Pipes and Dmitri Volkogonov have expressed the view that the killing was probably sanctioned by LeninThen everywhere else cites Pipes. What a shitty article.
No.1553949
MidnightBlueOwl is me. Somebody told me some crazy person was ranting about me on this forum. What's your fucking problem? I just write wikipedia pages. Somebody off their meds in here?
No.1553957
>>1553949>he visited en.wikipedia.org one timesir. you are a federal agent. your certificate is in the mail.
No.1554011
Maybe it's worth asking here
I once read an article on the Marxist position of prisons (regarding criminology) where it essentially quoted a text from an author to the effect of: Prisons and by extension crime is a reflection of the state of society and how it treats the violation of social norms.
I'm fairly certain the article has been altered since and the quote removed but I was wondering if anybody had ever come across it.
No.1558155
you're heard of Soviet empire, now get ready for De-Leninization:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De-Leninization>De-Leninization (Ukrainian: Ленінопад, romanized: Leninopad, lit. 'Leninfall') is political reform aimed at refuting Leninist and Marxist–Leninist ideology, ending the personality cult of Vladimir Lenin, removing images and toppling statues of Lenin, renaming places and buildings, dismantling the Lenin Mausoleum currently in Red Square, Moscow, and burying his mummified corpse. page created in March 2022 because of course it was. this was the state of it when wikiadmins decided to approve it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=De-Leninization&oldid=1086917291>Current Russian president Putin has praised Lenin. No.1560681
>>1558155>March 2022Looks like an interesting timeline…
No.1560698
>>1554011Do you have a link to the article?
It should be possible to go through its edit history
No.1560708
>>1554011>I'm fairly certain the article has been altered since and the quote removed check the version history. Wikipedia is fucked with by glowies, however one of the few good things is that every article has a version history where you can compare every version of the article that has ever existed with each other. It's not an intuitive interface, nor do most users know about it, but it's available to everyone, even people without accounts. Link the article.
No.1560798
>>1560704Burkina Faso created history when Fukuyama destroyed it.
No.1560802
>we’re going to infiltrate Wikipedia to make it more accurate guys let’s make sure to have a thread about it online with every little action we’ve ever taken documented for all to see
No.1560813
>>1560704>Today I was looking at the article on Burkina Faso political history, and I noticed that it started in 1990 ignoring not only the coup against Sankara, but the entire era of French colonial domination, and the entirety of pre-colonial history in the region. I found that so blatant.This is quite obviously absurd, it's worse than the burgroid biological weapons attacks on Best Korea and China being called allegations which is merely brutally wrong and misleading.
No.1560820
>>1560809Nobody said it was okay. Wikipedia isn’t even a credible source for schools to use, and anyone who glosses over a Wiki article for 5 minutes and thinks it’s all that’s necessary is an irredeemable retard that nobody cares about.
No.1560851
>>1537615If I hear this shit at an org from my ""comrades"", it's going to be a very short meeting.
No.1560960
>>1550295>this Michael Z user is even more interesting, having created nearly one page per day for 19 yearsglowing jokeshop website in a jokerified world. Intel poisons everything good, from encyclopedias to Pakistani vaccine programs.
No.1563053
>>1560704I wouldn't be surprised if there's text in the edit history. rescue it, then watch the page for glowies trying to revert your changes
No.1563197
>>1560737what a retarded meme. most nazis aren't vegans/vegetarians, and most vegans/vegitarians aren't nazis.
(not a vegan or vegetarian or nazi btw so no need to argue with me over about how i'm just a seething target of your meme)
No.1563201
>>1563195Apparently Sanger has been keeping track of it over the years and details it in the recent interview?
No.1563445
lately I've been reading various pages relating to Pooland, which are filled to the brim with reactionary nonsense. take the pages on the so-called cursed soldiers, which are consistently referred to as "resistance fighters" rather then terrorists
all this has me thinking maybe we should just point and laugh at the poop rather than trying to clean it up. on the other hand WP affects many impressionable youths
No.1590228
>>1589927>>1590212First source I checked.
>Coda Media has partnered with several newsrooms throughout Eurasia via the Coda Network, which received a grant of $180,130 from the US Government-backed National Endowment for Democracy. Coda is a 501(c)(3) organization with offices in New York City and Tbilisi, Republic of Georgia.lel
No.1590314
>>1590228>>1590228> US Government-backed National Endowment for DemocracyEvery
fucking
time
Everything
All the time
No.1604738
>>1532459The Afghan war could’ve not been a fuckup for the US if they actually invested CIA agents into actually gathering intelligence on the Taliban instead of fucking editing Wikipedia articles.
No.1605395
>>1560820Bad schools do. But even if they don't, students will often just footnotes that don't link to WP and use them.
Plus everybody gets their opinion from it, it usually shows up in the first three Google results. Stop pretending such massive internet platforms have no influence, that's silly.
No.1605591
>>1537615Those are liberals, Agent Smith.
No.1608718
how do you know the difference between a wikipedian being a glow op and just being a propaganda-cucked westoid?
No.1608723
>>1608718is there a functional difference?
No.1610994
the pages for the Waffan-SS Banderite given a standing ovation from the Canadian parliament, and the division he was part of, has some interesting traffic on them, as do their Talk pages
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaroslav_Hunkahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14th_Waffen_Grenadier_Division_of_the_SS_(1st_Galician)our favorite editor "Michael Z" shows up to defend deleting Hunka's page. he's being resoundly overruled however:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Yaroslav_Hunka No.1610997
>>1610994>Michael ZCaught this yesterday when voting on this, funny, full of keeps with this faggot seething impotently.
Really wants executing. People like this are why i do not have the mental energy to use wikipedia much anymore.
No.1611047
>>1610997I want him/them to seethe more
No.1614791
>>1548114I can't speak for the other anon, but I was banned simply for arguing on a talk page
No.1614794
>>1533175Wikipedia users often flair their user pages with silly buttons of their own creation. It's a very early 00s trend. Myspace pages used to be like that too. Before everything was a javashit app you were free to edit the HTML on your own user pages.
No.1618202
The most egregious is that they have a "denial of the uyghur genocide" page when they've never provided any evidence to allege genocide with in the first place.
No.1618302
>>1618202is there a word for the opposite of denial? manufactured genocide?
No.1646189
The fundamental issue with Wikipedia, is that you can't use primary sources over "reliable" sources, and only Western media, including ridiculously "radio free" are considered reliable.
This means, say a study says the sky is blue and New York Times reports the study reporting it said the sky is pink, and then The Telegraph reports on the NYT report saying the sky is pink, Wikipedia will report the study says the sky is pink, you point out in the talk page "actually the study is right here, it says the sky is blue" the study itself is overruled by the "reliable" sources.
I had this issue on the Uyghur Genocide page, where I would constantly post the original Chinese documents, point out they *didn't* say what Zenz and Western outlets reported, but because they are the primary sources, they are not considered reliable like Western media reporting is, so the page has knowingly *incorrect* information on it, that even the editors know is wrong, but it won't ever get removed because it's parroted by Western media.
No.1646245
>>1646189WP doesn't really define what "reliable" is, so you are free to just say the Western sources are unreliable. if the wikilibs object, bring up precisely what you say. then said libs have to justify their claim of reliability in light of the source reporting verifiably false things. bring the issue up repeatedly, with a few months' interval
another useful thing is that editors are under no obligation to use any particular source. just because a source is "reliable" doesn't mean it has to be used
No.1657910
>>1649847Of course these disgusting glowies want to delete this.
Yet nobody died during the “Uyghur genocide” yet they cry crocodile tears over it.
No.1657913
>>1610994He’s the same guy who advocated adding the “Uyghur genocide” as part of the “list of genocides”.
No.1657941
>>1537362
>by SOVİETOLOGİSTS to describe the extent of the Soviet Union's hegemony over the Second World.tf is """sovietology"""??
No.1657962
So I decided to check out the wiki page for the Ukrainian language. The section on the Stalin-era in the USSR it was packed with all kinds of claims of persecution and oppression, but it only had one citation. I quite literally haven't seen so many [citation needed] crammed into such a small space anywhere else.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_language No.1665350
Reminder
No.1665375
>>1657941Basically history and other similar sciences focused on studying USSR. 99% is cia cold war propaganda. People like Conquest and such.
No.1666684
>>1665375How tf do you actually learn Soviet history without western propaganda?
No.1666766
>>1666684you have to find gigachad historians like Wendy Z. Goldman and study from them because they are honest to their duty and not to Washington even if lib brained at times.
No.1684091
>>1683933it's not wrong, the annexation is recognized by only 7 countries including Russia, most of the world sees Crimea as part of Ukraine (officially at least, most of them don't really care either way)
No.1694420
This article is laughable
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deportation_of_the_Chechens_and_IngushCheck out the citations; includes Nicolas Werth and J. Otto Pohl who can regularly be found on Twitter squealing about "Jewish Bolshevism"
No.1695186
>>1695074>During Ukraine's post-Soviet history, the far-right has remained on the political periphery and been largely excluded from national politics since independence in 1991completely disregarding the Zelensky regime funding and arming freikorps like Azov
>Since then far-right parties have failed to gain enough votes to attain political representation, even at the height of nationalist sentiment during and after Russia's annexation of Crimea and the Russo-Ukrainian WarHMM I WONDER WHY PERHAPS IT'S BECAUSE THEY'VE POSTPONED ELECTIONS
No.1736245
So, Michael Z is shutting up about what’s going on in Gaza.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_genocides No.1736294
Ukrainians are holding the line and the battle around Bakhmut is still ongoing,
on Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Bakhmut No.1736297
>>1736294They locked the talk page as well to anyone but recognised editors (or whatever the wiki terms are) cause people kept coming in and asking how the fuck is the battle of Bakhmut still ongoing. Forces of Reality have made small gains by forcing the change rhat the battle "for the city" is over, but the battle "on the outskirts" is ongoing because the Ukrainians said they are working to encircle the city. Ukrainans are arguing that it is still ongoing cause "reputable sources" didn't explicitly write "Battle of Bakhmut is over". Since nobody is talking about Bakhmut any more and Western media certainly won't bring up that painful memory, this battle will go on forever.
No.1736326
>>1683933In fairness, most maps these days are basically just propaganda.
You'd think they'd be neutral representations of world's sovereign territories, but they aren't. These days, they're all what the UN officially thinks the world ought to look like. Even flags are becoming UN bullshit. With very few exceptions, Afghanistan is still represented by the flag of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan even though that government has been defunct for two fucking years now because its the one the UN recognizes.
No.1736328
>>1736326>Maduro isn't recognised as president of Venezuela>Lukashenka isn't recognised as president of Belarus>Taliban aren't recognised as government of Afghanistan>Zaporizhe, Kherson, Luhansk, Donetsk, Crimea aren't recognised as part of Russis>Somaliland isn't recognised as a sovereign stateIn ten years the "official" map of the world won't have any basis in reality
No.1736503
>>1736444check'd.
For comparison look at the "Liberation of Kherson" article.
No.1736509
>>1736503If this war wasn't the current thing or fought between geopolitically irrelevant nations this article would be called "Recapture of Kherson" or something. Hilarious. They don't even pretend to be impartial not even in titles.
My favorite thing about glowpedia's cover of the conflict though is that there's a page called "Russo-Ukrainian War" that covers everything from 2014 onwards. Just straight up uncritically transmitting Ukrainian state propaganda about how the Donbass War was just Russians invading.
No.1736561
>>1736297>They locked the talk page as well to anyone but recognised editorsyour account needs to be older than a month and have made at least 500 edits. hence why more comrades should register accounts
>>1736503>that flag in the backgroundalso this article apparently passes muster for notability:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raccoon_of_Kherson No.1761814
>>1761810This happened in July 2022?
No.1761826
>>1761810This note is pretty common, though? You can see it a lot when browsing corporate, NGO and "literally-who people" articles.
No.1761876
2022年有关中文维基的一个大新闻
当时我是披露这件事情的博主的粉丝，第一时间看到了这个
节选的报道来自：
https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/531735718
> 有人从2012年开始就在中文的维基百科里编造假的古俄历史词条，从编辑历史里可以查到有4800多次
> 有个网文小说作者在百科上查资料，发现一个叫“卡申银矿”的矿场在历史上并不存在，引起了一些网友的怀疑。
> 进而，网友自然对这个词条的编辑者产生了怀疑，这个人创立了有200多个有关俄国的条目，而她引用的很多文献都是假的，该编辑者也参与了外文百科的编撰，网友们于是进行了紧急处理，并且封禁了该编辑者。
> 此外，网友们还发现，一些其他的知名编辑者居然也是该编辑人的小号，编辑者会自编自导地用小号进行相互的吹捧。
> 那她为什么要这么做呢？按照网友的说法，是为了在玩文游的时候取得优势。
> 造假者提及了“自己高中肄业，没有上过大学。”
> 这件事不只是维基出了一个坏人，还包括审核人员在其中的不作为，让整个中文维基百科陷入不可信的怀疑中。再加上她的词条被中文维基选为优质，被翻译成其他语言，以至于各种语种的百科上有关俄国历史都有可能都有虚构内容了，可以说造成的影响是相当严重的。维基百科上关于这件事的词条：
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhemao_hoaxes知乎上有关这件事的谈论，其中包括了揭发者的回答：
https://www.zhihu.com/question/537968219老实说我也想在维基上恶作剧，我也是没有上过正式大学，为什么不能在维基上写一部托洛茨基组织的墨西哥游击队大战斯大林领导的美国共产党In 2022, there was a major news story about the Chinese Wikipedia. At that time, I was a fan of the blogger who exposed this incident and saw it firsthand.
The excerpted report is from:
https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/531735718
> Since 2012, someone has been fabricating false entries on ancient Russian history in the Chinese Wikipedia. A review of the editing history reveals more than 4800 instances.
> A web novel author, while researching on the encyclopedia, discovered that a mining site called 'Kashen Silver Mine' never existed in history, raising suspicions among some netizens.
> As a result, netizens naturally became suspicious of the editor of this entry. This individual created over 200 articles related to Russia, and many of the references cited were found to be fake. The editor also participated in the compilation of foreign-language encyclopedias. In response, netizens took urgent measures and subsequently banned the editor.
> Furthermore, netizens also discovered that some other well-known editors were actually alternate accounts of the same individual. The editor would self-promote using these alternate accounts to praise their own work.
> Why did she do this? According to netizens, it was to gain an advantage while playing online literary games.
> The fabricator mentioned that she 'dropped out of high school and never attended college.'
> This incident not only revealed a dishonest contributor on Wikipedia but also highlighted the inaction of the reviewing personnel, casting the entire Chinese Wikipedia into a cloud of distrust. Furthermore, her entries were selected as high-quality on the Chinese Wikipedia, translated into other languages. As a result, there is a possibility that fabricated content about Russian history exists on encyclopedias in various languages. The impact of this situation can be considered quite severe.
> Wikipedia entry regarding this incident: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhemao_hoaxes
> Discussions on Zhihu about this matter, including answers from the whistleblower: https://www.zhihu.com/question/537968219To be honest, I also want to pull a prank on Wikipedia. I haven't attended a formal university either. Why can't I write about a Trotskyist organization's guerrilla warfare in Mexico against the American Communist Party led by Stalin on Wikipedia? No.1761883
>>1761814>>1761826No I have ever only seen the note with 'this article seems to be based on own research etc.'
Not this one that explicitly says PAYMENT
No.1761885
>>1695186>Since then far-right parties have failed to gain enough votes to attain political representationWell tbh the cheeky part of this is pretending like this means far-right ideologies lost popularity in Ukraine when the reality is that such ideology just got integrated into the policies of parties that had more than just "fuck Russia" as a plan for governance.
It'd be like saying because UKIP lost popularity after Euro-scepticism got integrated in to the policies of the Conservative Party, the UK no longer desired Brexit.
No.1761899
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackson_Hinklethe state of Hinkle's article now is hilarious, given that it was seemingly started by infrared people
>Politically, Hinkle has been variously described as an American conservative, MAGA, right-wing, and far-right influencer.while it does mention Hinkle claiming to be an ML, it doesn't mention what party he's involved with. probably because he isn't
No.1761935
>>1761810Here is the article:
French oligarch and owner of major newspaper and internet providers, as well as domestic partner of Europe's richest billionaire.
No.1761994
>>1761899>seemingly started by infrared peopleThose people are banned from Wikipedia now btw. Seems like they were probably paid editors. One of them had a past of making promotional pages and had already been topic-banned or something. Pretty good chance Hinkle paid some people to make the page.
No.1762236
>>1761994>Pretty good chance Hinkle paid some people to make the page.would be hilarious if true
>hmm today I will wander into a nest of libs and write a self-aggrandizing page about myself and Haz>oh no I have been exposed and now they've extended-protected the page about myself and are exposing my barely concealed grift No.1764904
>>1764855does this look like the face of a liar to you?
the Katyn page also doesn't mention the
German brass found at the site
No.1782852
>>1532191>>1532459I see that this has actually been removed from the List of genocide and no wikilibs has since brought it back
No.1787811
>>1531900good thread i saw a single transhumanist singlehandedly overhaul several jfk and nixon related pages.
don't doubt how autistic this website is, but always remember glow wins
No.1806892
>>1806780liberal child's understanding of the USSR
>>1806808OK. I did as you asked. :^)
No.1806901
>>1806894>Western state funded media: reliable<Russian state funded media: not reliableit's a fucking miracle al jazeera is tolerated
No.1806907
>>1806894I think the best interaction I had so far was one wikilib going "RT has received medals from Putler!", as if the CIA isn't heavily involved in pretty much all US mainstream media. but then again WP considers RFE/RL to be "reliable" so..
No.1807385
>>1807197if you look in the Talk page you'll see the problem is that the sources are a bunch of tweets
it isn't out of the ordinary for pages to have lackluster sources that only get discovered when their subjects gain sudden notoriety
No.1807440
>>1807394i do actually care that the information im spreading is true
No.1807441
>>1807385do you think the nyt or wapo are ever going to report on this? the only sources available are obviously going to be alternative media (which westoidpedia conveniently doesn’t consider to be reliable)
No.1807442
>>1807440and it being on bourgeois media makes it more reliable to you? lmao retard
No.1807444
>>1807440That's nice, but Glowpedia clearly doesn't.
That the burgers were Caught In the Act here isn't controversial.
No.1807445
>>1807442are you really arguing that unsourced tweets are reliable
No.1807447
>>1807444obviously, that is why im here in the glowpedia thread. IS-K also clearly glows hard as fuck, ive been noting that in a few threads for the past few days. i dont see why any of that should mean i defend unsourced tweets as good evidence, it just makes what i know to be a well-grounded position look like crank shit
No.1807448
>>1807445>unsourcedlmao you're such a fucking dog to capital, it's unreal
https://nitter.poast.org/AmrullahSaleh2/status/1463039531268120579#mhttps://nitter.poast.org/StateDeptCT/status/1462900194094116867#mpresident of the islamic republic of afghanistan (american puppet govt) and an official twitter account of the US state department, both from 2021
KILL YOURSELF FAGGOT No.1807454
>>1807447Again,
Nobody cares, most people will just lap this shit up not think you're a crank.
No.1807456
>>1807448ok i was totally wrong, did not know that from the screencap of sources and i did not open twitter to check
No.1807458
>>1807456>did not know that from the screencap of sourcesit's literally written right there in the screencap, that's how i got the link to the tweets
No.1807505
>>1807394I'm going to agree with
>>1807440 . we should care that porky uses what presents itself as a bottom-up effort to collect and spread information, for spreading porkoid propaganda
>>1807441maybe, maybe not. make some noise about it at least
No.1809369
>>1807394>Nobody cares>>1807444>That's nice>isn't controversial.>>1807454>Again,>Nobody caresThis is a known, flagged hasabra tactic. Everyone itt thread clearly cares. Shut the fuck up.
>>1807456>ok i was totally wrong,Retardation or glow, the outcome is the same: disruption.
>>1807448>>1807458Based.
No.1818333
My favorite moments from Wikipedia is when they have to tell the truth.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Harvest_of_Sorrow - under "background"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Bukharin - under "Fall From Power"
No.1818348
>>1818333What should be known about that Conquest character? He is being referred quite a lot it feels.
No.1818429
>>1818333>The Harvest of Sorrow had a clear moral intent, namely that if the older Soviet leaders were direct accomplices in an artificially contrived famine and the younger leaders today still justify such procedure, then it followed that they might be willing to kill tens of millions of foreigners or suffer a loss of millions of their own subjects in a war. Conquest stated: "I don't think they want to blow Western populations to pieces. But if they came to America and imposed the collective farm system, then they might well organize a famine."Conquest just making shit up
>a variety of sources>Soviet fictionlol
>Conquest had 'adopted the Ukraine exile view [on the origins of the famine of 1932–33], and he has persuaded this reviewer.conveniently ignoring that Ukrainian exiles were largely fascists
>>1818348his WP page even admits his estimate for the number of dead in the purges are greatly exaggerated:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Conquest>By [Conquest's] estimates, Stalinist purges had led to the deaths of some 20 million people. He later stated that the total number of deaths could "hardly be lower than some thirteen to fifteen million."of course J. CHAD Getty disagrees with this nonsense
No.1820993
>>1818333To continue the trend of Wikipedia admitting open-secrets, here's a screenshot from the Angolan civil war page (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angolan_Civil_War ) basically admitting that they used Hollywood as propaganda. Here's the link to that Jack Abramoff guy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_AbramoffAlso, I don't know if this counts, but it seems that on the history page of The People's Republic of Mozambique (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Republic_of_Mozambique ), they keep using a source by João Cabrita, which was published by these guys:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palgrave_MacmillanIs João Cabrita the Robert Conquest of Mozambique?
Unique IPs: 96