The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
Wikipedia claims its main purpose is to:<blockquote>"benefit readers by acting as a '''widely accessible and free encyclopedia'''; a comprehensive written compendium that contains information on all branches of knowledge."<ref name=":3">{{News citation|newspaper=Wikipedia|title=Wikipedia:Purpose|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Purpose|retrieved=2022-7-16}}</ref></blockquote>Wikipedia further claims that:<blockquote>"The goal of a Wikipedia article is to present a neutrally written summary of existing mainstream knowledge in a fair and accurate manner with a straightforward, "just-the-facts style". Articles should have an encyclopedic style with a formal tone instead of essay-like, argumentative, promotional or opinionated writing."<ref name=":3" /></blockquote>It also claims that:<blockquote>"Wikipedia's content is governed by three principal core content policies - neutral point of view, verifiability, and no original research."<ref name=":3" /></blockquote>In practice, these principles push Wikipedia editorship towards being [[Liberalism|liberal]] (pro-capitalism and pro-[[imperialism]]) and using [[bourgeois media]] as infallible sources. With time (over 20 years of Wikipedia existing), this created a self-reproducing culture of liberalism within Wikipedia which is heavily punished if one deviates from it. | Wikipedia claims its main purpose is to:<blockquote>"benefit readers by acting as a '''widely accessible and free encyclopedia'''; a comprehensive written compendium that contains information on all branches of knowledge."<ref name=":3">{{News citation|newspaper=Wikipedia|title=Wikipedia:Purpose|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Purpose|retrieved=2022-7-16}}</ref></blockquote>Wikipedia further claims that:<blockquote>"The goal of a Wikipedia article is to present a neutrally written summary of existing mainstream knowledge in a fair and accurate manner with a straightforward, "just-the-facts style". Articles should have an encyclopedic style with a formal tone instead of essay-like, argumentative, promotional or opinionated writing."<ref name=":3" /></blockquote>It also claims that:<blockquote>"Wikipedia's content is governed by three principal core content policies - neutral point of view, verifiability, and no original research."<ref name=":3" /></blockquote>In practice, these principles push Wikipedia editorship towards being [[Liberalism|liberal]] (pro-capitalism and pro-[[imperialism]]) and using [[bourgeois media]] as infallible sources. With time (over 20 years of Wikipedia existing), this created a self-reproducing culture of liberalism within Wikipedia which is heavily punished if one deviates from it. | ||
Additionally, Wikipedia doesn't prevent lobbyists from paying people to edit pages.<ref name=":4" | Additionally, Wikipedia doesn't prevent lobbyists from paying people to edit pages.<ref name=":4" /> | ||
== Criticism == | == Criticism == | ||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
====CEO Katherine Maher==== | ====CEO Katherine Maher==== | ||
Katherine Maher, the | Katherine Maher, the current CEO of the foundation, previously worked for the World Bank, specifically in the African and Middle-East divisions.<ref>[https://wikimediafoundation.org/profile/katherine-maher/ Katherine Maher profile]. Wikimedia Foundation.</ref> She also worked at the [[National Democratic Institute]] and is a fellow at the Truman National Security Project. In a June 2020 article from ''[[The Grayzone]]'', authors [[Ben Norton]] and [[Max Blumenthal]] delved deeper into Maher's connections to regime-change operatives and unearthed her whole résumé which linked her to more imperialist organisations and institutes.<ref name=":5" /> In particular, Maher went to Libya in early 2011, right before the Arab Spring began. | ||
In April 2017, she participated in a briefing for the U.S. State Department and appeared in a panel with the former director of the [[Central Intelligence Agency|CIA]] and NSA in 2018. She is now on the advisory board of the [[Open Technology Fund]], which was created by CIA propaganda outlet [[Radio Free Asia]].<ref>{{Web citation|newspaper=Open Technology Fund|title=OTF's History|url=https://www.opentech.fund/about/our-history/|quote=... the Open Technology Fund (OTF) was created in 2012 as a program of Radio Free Asia.}}</ref> | In April 2017, she participated in a briefing for the U.S. State Department and appeared in a panel with the former director of the [[Central Intelligence Agency|CIA]] and NSA in 2018. She is now on the advisory board of the [[Open Technology Fund]], which was created by CIA propaganda outlet [[Radio Free Asia]].<ref>{{Web citation|newspaper=Open Technology Fund|title=OTF's History|url=https://www.opentech.fund/about/our-history/|quote=... the Open Technology Fund (OTF) was created in 2012 as a program of Radio Free Asia.}}</ref> | ||
====User demographics==== | ====User demographics==== | ||
| Line 46: | Line 44: | ||
Wikipedia is purposely kept difficult to edit (providing only a plain-text markup editor, resolving conflicts through talk pages that have been filling up since 2010, etc.) so that administrators, most of whom have been editing Wikipedia since it became famous in 2003, can keep problematic users out citing technicalities and preventing them from defending themselves. | Wikipedia is purposely kept difficult to edit (providing only a plain-text markup editor, resolving conflicts through talk pages that have been filling up since 2010, etc.) so that administrators, most of whom have been editing Wikipedia since it became famous in 2003, can keep problematic users out citing technicalities and preventing them from defending themselves. | ||
Administrators are the supreme decision-making authority, making them very worthwhile friends to have. They are also not accountable to anyone and can freely pick new people to join their ranks. It is not rare for users going against the agenda set out by the administrators to simply be banned on frivolous grounds. Around | Administrators are the supreme decision-making authority, making them very worthwhile friends to have. They are also not accountable to anyone and can freely pick new people to join their ranks. It is not rare for users going against the agenda set out by the administrators to simply be banned on frivolous grounds. Around 1000 IP addresses are banned by Wikipedia administrators every day. There is little privacy and users may be traced and tracked by Wikipedia administrators.<ref>[http://fullmeasure.news/news/cover-story/the-dark-side-of-wikipedia “The Dark Side of Wikipedia”]. ''Full Measure,'' 21 August 2016.</ref> | ||
====Anonymous or non-prolific users==== | ====Anonymous or non-prolific users==== | ||
[[File:Wikipedia paid-editor policy example..png|thumb|366x366px|Wikipedia permits people paid by pro-capitalist organizations to edit on their articles.<ref name=":4">{{News citation|newspaper=Wikipedia|title=Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Paid-contribution_disclosure|retrieved=2022-6-28}}</ref>]] | |||
New users who do not take time to learn of the obscure templates, navigate through the very strict (and sometimes absurd) editorial guidelines or do not socialize with other users will often see their edits reverted in mere minutes, no matter how accurate or labour-intensive their edits were. | New users who do not take time to learn of the obscure templates, navigate through the very strict (and sometimes absurd) editorial guidelines or do not socialize with other users will often see their edits reverted in mere minutes, no matter how accurate or labour-intensive their edits were. | ||
The Wikimedia foundation will still claim that their encyclopedia is "community-created". This is mainly a convenient lie for Wales to make it seem like his libertarian principles can work on a large scale. This has prompted Ben Norton to call Wikipedia a scam<ref>{{Web citation|author=Ben Norton|newspaper=Twitter|title=It has been known for well over a decade (this report is from 2007) that Wikipedia is heavily edited by corporations and governments and PR flacks they hire to spread propaganda. Enough with this absurd techno-"libertarian" nonsense. It was always a scam|date=2020-02-12|url=https://twitter.com/BenjaminNorton/status/1227725961975803905}}</ref> (in the interest of Jimmy Wales' | The Wikimedia foundation will still claim that their encyclopedia is "community-created". This is mainly a convenient lie for Wales to make it seem like his libertarian principles can work on a large scale. This has prompted Ben Norton to call Wikipedia a scam<ref>{{Web citation|author=Ben Norton|newspaper=Twitter|title=It has been known for well over a decade (this report is from 2007) that Wikipedia is heavily edited by corporations and governments and PR flacks they hire to spread propaganda. Enough with this absurd techno-"libertarian" nonsense. It was always a scam|date=2020-02-12|url=https://twitter.com/BenjaminNorton/status/1227725961975803905}}</ref> (in the interest of Jimmy Wales' bourgeois, libertarian interests). In truth, much like [[libertarianism]] itself, it remains controlled by corporate elites and imperialist organisations. | ||
===Sexism=== | |||
Women have been speaking about the [[sexism]] they faced on Wikipedia for many years, as about 90% of the user base is male according to Wikipedia's own study.<ref>{{Web citation|newspaper=Wikimedia|title=Gender across Wikimedia project contributors in 2018, weighted|date=2018|url=https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b7/LE15_Gender_overall_in_2018.png}}</ref> | |||
Women are generally discouraged from participating through widespread bullying and harassment.<ref>Emma Paling. [https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/10/how-wikipedia-is-hostile-to-women/411619/ “Wikipedia's hostility to women”]. ''The Atlantic,'' 21 October 2015.</ref> Notably, several women were brought on board various projects aimed at reducing "gender bias" (Wikipedia's technical term for its sexist atmosphere), and all left after facing repeated harassment. This issue has been brought to the Wikimedia foundation's attention, to which founder Jimmy Wales responded, in one case:<blockquote>I’m afraid I don’t know enough about the specific details here to be able to make a meaningful comment.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales/Archive_178#Said_at_GGTF_arbitration</ref></blockquote>Articles about famous women are often deleted or see their edits reverted, rendering them invisible. Edits by women themselves are often reverted as well, no matter how good the quality may be. | |||
=== Racism and | === Racism and white supremacy=== | ||
==== Distortion of Polish involvement in the Holocaust ==== | ==== Distortion of Polish involvement in the Holocaust ==== | ||
In the last decade, a group of committed Wikipedia editors | In the last decade, a group of committed Wikipedia editors have been promoting a skewed version of the history of the Holocaust on the English instance, one touted by right-wing Polish nationalists, which whitewashes the role of Polish society in the Holocaust and bolsters stereotypes about Jews. Due to this group’s zealous handiwork, Wikipedia’s articles on the Holocaust in Poland minimize Polish antisemitism, exaggerate the Poles’ role in saving Jews, insinuate that most Jews supported Communism and conspired with Communists to betray Poles (''Żydokomuna'' or Judeo–Bolshevism), blame Jews for their own persecution, and inflate Jewish collaboration with the Nazis.<ref>{{Web citation|author=Jan Grabowski, Shira Klein|newspaper=Taylor&Francis Online|title=Wikipedia’s Intentional Distortion of the History of the Holocaust|date=2023-02-09|url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25785648.2023.2168939|archive-url=https://archive.ph/OIY9Z}}</ref> | ||
====Congolese genocide denial==== | ====Congolese genocide denial==== | ||
The article on the | The article on the genocide that happened in the [[Congo Free State (1885–1909)|Congo Free State]]<ref name=":1">https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Atrocities_in_the_Congo_Free_State&oldid=986289478<br>Quoting the article in question:<blockquote>''"The significant number of deaths under the Free State regime has led some scholars to relate the atrocities to later genocides, though understanding of the losses under the colonial administration's rule as the result of harsh economic exploitation rather than a policy of deliberate extermination has led others to dispute the comparison; '''there is an open debate as to whether the atrocities constitute genocide'''."''</blockquote>We have also a [https://prolewiki.org/images/6/61/Wikipedia_Congolese_genocide_denial.png full page print] if Wikipedia ever decides to take the article down. This cited quote was taken from the section ''Historiography and the term "genocide"''.</ref> (the [[Kingdom of Belgium|Belgian]] colony of the [[Democratic Republic of the Congo|Congo]]), is now called ''Atrocities in the Congo Free State'' following a dispute between white and minority users over the previous name of ''Congolese Genocide''. | ||
User ''Brigade Piron'',<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Brigade_Piron</ref> a white Belgian nationalist editor, claims that the term genocide is contested and at this time the article contradicts itself: first making it seem like the Congolese Genocide was caused mainly by disease, later saying it was caused by "harsh economic exploitation, rather than a policy of deliberate extermination".<ref name=":1" /> Most edits of the article come from another white European, user ''Indy Beetle'', from [[Swiss Confederation|Switzerland]].<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Atrocities_in_the_Congo_Free_State&offset=&limit=500&action=history<br>Contains more than 160 edits by Wikipedia user Indy Beetle.</ref> | |||
=== | ==== Accusations of genocide in the Haitian revolution ==== | ||
[[ | Wikipedia accuses the [[Republic of Haiti|Haitian]] revolutionary [[Jean-Jacques Dessalines]], who overthrew [[French]] [[colonialism]] and ended [[slavery]] in his country, of committing [[genocide]] against white colonists.<ref>{{Web citation|newspaper=Wikipedia|title=Jean-Jacques Dessalines|date=2023-02-05|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jean-Jacques_Dessalines&oldid=1141432955|retrieved=2023-02-26}}</ref> | ||
Although Wikipedia purports to be a reliable and neutral source of knowledge, it has been mangled by several known cases of corruption, involving paid editors hired to whitewash their clients' reputation. A former lawyer, user edsussman, has been hired by [[Meta Platforms, Inc.|Facebook]] PR, news companies Axios and [[National Broadcasting Company|NBC]] to tweak pages related to the respective client in a favorable manner, all while adhering to the rules of the site.<ref>Ashley Feinberg. [https://www.huffpost.com/entry/wikipedia-paid-editing-pr-facebook-nbc-axios_n_5c63321be4b03de942967225 “Facebook, Axios And NBC paid this guy to whitewash Wikipedia pages”]. ''The Huffpost,'' 14 March 2019.</ref> | ===Corruption=== | ||
Although Wikipedia purports to be a reliable and neutral source of knowledge, it has been mangled by several known cases of corruption, involving paid editors hired to whitewash their clients' reputation. A former lawyer, user ''edsussman'', has been hired by [[Meta Platforms, Inc.|Facebook]] PR, news companies Axios and [[National Broadcasting Company|NBC]] to tweak pages related to the respective client in a favorable manner, all while adhering to the rules of the site.<ref>Ashley Feinberg. [https://www.huffpost.com/entry/wikipedia-paid-editing-pr-facebook-nbc-axios_n_5c63321be4b03de942967225 “Facebook, Axios And NBC paid this guy to whitewash Wikipedia pages”]. ''The Huffpost,'' 14 March 2019.</ref>[[File:Wikipedia imperialist censorship.png|alt=Wikipedia censorship of trustworthy news media.|thumb|These are news sources which Wikipedia considers unreliable. Highlighted in yellow are actually trustworthy sources of information which disputes the US imperialist propaganda narrative.]] | |||
===Bias by design=== | |||
Ultimately, Wikipedia is designed to promote imperialist interests. Not only are most edits made by accounts managed by/for corporations and government agencies, the whole website structure is made to keep this agenda in place. Yet, the Wikimedia Foundation would like to make people believe that Wikipedia is edited by "anyone" and that every article of theirs is trustworthy. | |||
==Ties to imperialist organizations== | ==Ties to imperialist organizations== | ||