Comment by mzajc | Hacker News Reader

Comment by mzajc | Hacker News Reader

I encourage people to read through his proposed WikiProject's page[0] and the related discussion.[1] Important context is also that WikiProjects are exempt from canvassing rules; members are free to notify each other of ongoing policy discussions with the goal of influencing the outcome.

This is usually not a problem, but given how aggressively vague the WikiProject's goals are (eg. "We hope to open Wikipedia up to using more sources" - which?) and Larry Sanger's prior conduct (eg. advocating for whitelisting of sources like Fox News[2]), it seems the real goal was organizing conservative editors. I'm not sure whether the fact that this is not clearly written is deception or trolling, but it's not a good look for Sanger either way.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Larry_Sanger/WikiProject_...

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cou...

[2]: https://san.com/cc/wikipedia-co-founder-says-site-has-libera...

  > advocating for whitelisting of sources like Fox News

As I understood it, he wasn't advocating for whitelisting Fox News, he was advocating for removing the blacklist. That's a stark difference.

  > it's not a good look for Sanger either way.

What doesn't look good for him? It doesn't seem that he has an intent other than enabling the viewpoint of those other than the far-left, which compromise almost the entirety of Wikipedias admins and editors.

Can you show me a single far left wikipedia admin?

Heh, I remember being surprised when I looked up the editor for some great Russian history articles and saw that he identified as a straight-up monarchist.

Wikipedia editors are a bunch of diverse, geeky kooks.

> the far-left, which compromise almost the entirety of Wikipedias admins and editors.

Yeah, citation needed on that one.

>he was advocating for removing the blacklist.

Seems like a distinction without a difference to me. If he got his way the website would quickly be overrun with right wing misinformation campaigns. I hope he stays banned.

For many topics Wikipedia is well known to be overrun with left wing campaigns - LGBT, and US political topics chief among them.

I'd rather see neither side successfully oust the other. But it seems that the left got there first and is entrenched.

For many topics right wing ideas are just factually incorrect. This isn't Wikipedia's fault.

How is "LGBT" left wing??

Furthermore, I'm not in the US, but "US politics" doesn't seem to have much left wing about it either.

Unfortunately from a US perspective being a sexual minority/trans is left wing by default because our right wingers hate them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com