Hacker News Reader

Comment by k1m | Hacker News Reader

It's not that long. Did you read it?

One Wikipedia editor is trying to highlight the problem of Cross' edits and have him marked as having a conflict of interest on certain articles. The Wikipedia admin (or superiour, I'm not familiar with the Wikipedia hierarchy) shuts him down very rudely and doesn't appear to want to address the issue at all. Leaving the editor to give up: "Forgive me for concluding that Wikipedia is circling its wagons around Philip Cross...I know when the deck is stacked against me."

View on HN

Wikipedia is not a hierarchy. Admins are experienced wikipedians who have a few extra administrative tasks (hence the name). The Admin in question seems to have acted based on their own judgment. (I know because I asked them! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:JzG#meatball:ExpandS... ) . You could even talk to the admin yourself, if you would like extra information. Wikipedia has a function to add questions to a talk page, and there is a function to send an email instead/as well, if you have questions.

That said, I went looking around, and there appear to be politicians and russian media involved here. This is not a "Evil admin stomps on poor innocent victim" story, for sure.

What are you suggesting with your last comment? Did you read the story posted here and the changes Philip Cross has made?

"I went looking around, and there appear to be politicians and russian media involved here." - Is that the level of evidence needed to do whatever you want on Wikipedia?

Yes, I have read most carefully. And I have also talked to one of the admins, as you can see.

Obviously, things are not adding up. We can both agree on that much ;-)

What I don't quite get is why fivefilters.org is interested?

Because we like the work of many of the people targeted by Cross and decided to write something up on it.

Oh, JzG is Guy Chapman! I remember him from usenet back in the day. I haven't interacted with him in almost a decade, but i remember that he was one of the good guys, even if he did take it a bit seriously.

Seeing a link to Meatball is also a blast from the past - i just about remember the drama when it split off from Ward's Wiki.

Reminiscences aside, i suppose these are both reminders that Wikipedia is a living fossil; it was started in the early days of the web (not the early early days, but early enough), drew its participants and culture from other places which existed at the time, and has been evolving on its own terms ever since.

Maybe that editor is Philip Cross?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com