5 ms·

The title doesn't match what's in the article. A better title would be 'Wikipedia's editors are mostly men and they don't have an understanding of non-heterosex

The title doesn't match what's in the article. A better title would be 'Wikipedia's editors are mostly men and they don't have an understanding of non-heterosexual ideas or people'. It seems like editors have arguments on these topics, according to the article. Not harassment on every topic under the sun

bubblewrap 7y ago
How do you go from "having arguments over topic x" to "having a poor understanding of topic x"?
- boomlinde 7y ago
  How do you go from "posting pictures of genitalia on user pages" to "having arguments over topic x"?
  - bubblewrap 7y ago
    Not rereading the article again, but I am pretty sure posting pictures of genitalia on user pages was not the only thing going on. As a rule, just because an asshole or idiot disagrees with you, it doesn't make you right. Stop trying to use that as an argument.
    - boomlinde 7y ago
      > Not rereading the article again, but I am pretty sure posting pictures of genitalia on user pages was not the only thing going on. On the other hand I'm pretty sure that "having arguments over topic x" wasn not the only thing going on either. > As a rule, just because an asshole or idiot disagrees with you, it doesn't make you right. Stop trying to use that as an argument. Where is that used as an argument?
belorn 7y ago
A title like that would be flagged and do nothing but to further the flame of a gender war.
Shivetya 7y ago
the issue seems to be, agenda driven groups are finding their attempts to change pages thwarted by content managers who are more concerned about accuracy. this is far more common on the English speaking version of Wikipedia than elsewhere. and typical of the situation, when the agenda is thwarted regardless of reason fall back on the media to shame the group standing in the way and be sure to portray it in an offensive manner not withstanding the real issue

bubblewrap 7y ago

How do you go from "having arguments over topic x" to "having a poor understanding of topic x"?

boomlinde 7y ago
How do you go from "posting pictures of genitalia on user pages" to "having arguments over topic x"?
- bubblewrap 7y ago
  Not rereading the article again, but I am pretty sure posting pictures of genitalia on user pages was not the only thing going on. As a rule, just because an asshole or idiot disagrees with you, it doesn't make you right. Stop trying to use that as an argument.
  - boomlinde 7y ago
    > Not rereading the article again, but I am pretty sure posting pictures of genitalia on user pages was not the only thing going on. On the other hand I'm pretty sure that "having arguments over topic x" wasn not the only thing going on either. > As a rule, just because an asshole or idiot disagrees with you, it doesn't make you right. Stop trying to use that as an argument. Where is that used as an argument?

belorn 7y ago

A title like that would be flagged and do nothing but to further the flame of a gender war.

Shivetya 7y ago

the issue seems to be, agenda driven groups are finding their attempts to change pages thwarted by content managers who are more concerned about accuracy. this is far more common on the English speaking version of Wikipedia than elsewhere. and typical of the situation, when the agenda is thwarted regardless of reason fall back on the media to shame the group standing in the way and be sure to portray it in an offensive manner not withstanding the real issue