Wikipedianon

5 ms·

1.
by Wikipedianon 4mo ago
Wikipedia bureaucracy is unlike other bureaucracies because there's accountability and it is decentralized. On Wikipedia, the possibly Israeli intelligence operative known as "Icewhiz" spent years cultivating an account kno
2.
by Wikipedianon 4mo ago
Here's the applicable policy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Canvassing Generally, it is unacceptable to notify people of a structured discussion in a non-neutral manner to get them to advocate a specific
3.
by Wikipedianon 4mo ago
I know of most of them, at this point. I was heavily involved in that segment of Wikipedia including Sockpuppet Investigations. The pro-Israel ones have been around for decades. Icewhiz, NoCal100, etc. They are easy to spot because they a
4.
by Wikipedianon 4mo ago
> The more organized and professional they are about shilling, the better they do. This is incorrect. Shills do well when they contribute outside of the topic area, memorize wiki-law, and only coordinate to !vote in contentious high-impa
5.
by Wikipedianon 4mo ago
From a brief skim, the list includes pretty much all active Arbitration Enforcement (AE) admins. For those not in the loop, AE is the main mechanism to enforce civility and neutrality in contentious areas (obvious stuff like Israel-Palestin
6.
by Wikipedianon 4mo ago
It's not a good idea for common languages like German or English or French. But it is a great idea for indigenous languages that aren't in the training data but many people speak, which was the original purpose. I am hopeful that
7.
by Wikipedianon 4mo ago
Most articles on notable AND interesting subjects have already been written and are of a high quality. "notability" means there are peer-reviewed/editorially controlled articles on the topic. So, if I wanted to write an artic
8.
by Wikipedianon 4mo ago
> What's the relevance? Wikipedia contributors aren't employed by Wikipedia. Their work is volunteered, and nobody asks them to do it. Yet, there's tons of people that love having control over articles and what people se
9.
by Wikipedianon 4mo ago
That's the English Wikipedia community in a nutshell. The WMF knows it's an issue but can't do anything about it. There isn't enough work anymore in a monopolized but declining market. A shrinking pie forces cliquey poli
10.
by Wikipedianon 4mo ago
Some English Wikipedia (enwiki) editors are striking. They are predominantly non-technical that are forced to maintain their own shadow IT-style infrastructure that Wikimedia (nonprofit owners of Wikipedia) doesn't provide. It is ver
11.
by Wikipedianon 7mo ago
There shouldn't be any interface admins as such. There should be an enforced review process for changes to global JavaScript so stuff like this can't happen. I'm sure there are Google engineers who can push changes to prod an
12.
by Wikipedianon 7mo ago
This is half true, because Wikipedia admins had the ability to edit sitewide JavaScript until 2018. A certain number of "community" admins maintain that right to this day after it was realized this was a massive security hole.
13.
by Wikipedianon 7mo ago
The sitewide JavaScript/CSS is an editable Wiki page. You can also upload scripts to be shared and executed by other users.
14.
by Wikipedianon 7mo ago
It's a political issue. Editors are unwilling or unable to contribute to development of the features they need to edit. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is run on insecure user scripts created by volunteers that tend to be under the age of 18.
15.
by Wikipedianon 7mo ago
This was only a matter of time. The Wikipedia community takes a cavalier attitude towards security. Any user with "interface administrator" status can change global JavaScript or CSS for all users on a given Wiki with no review. T
16.
by Wikipedianon 1y ago
"No one doxxing others in that particular clique is going to do it from anything other than a burner account." This is incorrect. many do it with accounts linked to their real onwiki profiles. jps is an example and I provided a li
17.
by Wikipedianon 1y ago
What about the part where they revealed the full name of the person allegedly behind the two usernames?
18.
by Wikipedianon 1y ago
it's a hit-and-run because I don't want to get doxxed. I dont want a world in which Trump regulates Wikipedia but pretending it's sunshine and rainbows is a joke at this point. And the person you're replying to is strawm
19.
by Wikipedianon 1y ago
Beeblebrox leaked internal mailing list messages to a forum known for doxxing in violation of the NDA they signed. i know that Beeblebrox did not doxx anyone and I said that in my comment. my point is leaking information to a doxxing forum
20.
by Wikipedianon 1y ago
The article criticizes doxxing but well-known Wikipedia editors doxx each other all the time... There's a site called Wikipediocracy that's been around for 20 years and an Arbitrator (Wiki's Supreme Court) was suspended for l