Hacker News Reader

Comment by bArray | Hacker News Reader

I support their point of view and agree with their protest, but one reason against this could be the potential politicizing and weaponisation of Wikipedia. Do you want one of the largest collectives of human information to take sides (in any debate) and selectively remove its service?

I think I would prefer a banner or a landing page more as it doesn't introduce any barrier to the information they provide.

View on HN

> Do you want one of the largest collectives of human information to take sides (in any debate) and selectively remove its service

When that debate is about access to that information, definitely, yes.

The point is well taken that doing such things should be rare and done very carefully.

You feel this isn't one of the cases when it's necessary?

The parent's implication being that this is one of the cases where people could reasonably believe it isn't necessary.

Yeah and I am asking explicitly because it seems unbelievable and I'd like to hear why.

I assume Wikipedia is protesting because it directly affects them. I don't see how it's problematic to advocate for themselves sometimes.

Because it is expected that they are as neutral as possible. People should advocate for encyclopedias, but they should not have opinions themselves. That impression can be argued to be wrong, of course.

Well, it is explicitly stated in the linked statement that

> “Wikipedia’s articles are neutral, [but] its existence is not.”

You might disagree with that position, but if you expect Wikipedia as a platform to be neutral, you have not been paying attention.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com