Comment on YSK: When you want to learn the facts on a controversial topic, check Wikipedia
Maven@lemmy.sdf.org 8 months agoSee, it sounds like that’s another way of saying “If you don’t have a ton of spare time and nothing better to do with it, don’t even try to edit Wikipedia”
antidote101@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Depends whether your edits are consistently bad enough that they’re reverted every time.
If so, then yeah, you shouldn’t be editing Wikipedia.
Maven@lemmy.sdf.org 8 months ago
I mean, the premise was “vindictive or mean editors who ‘own’ pages and refuse to allow changes to ‘their’ article”. The goodness or badness of the edits are not in question; there are editors who camp a page and find technicalities to revert anything that isn’t theirs or that they don’t like. Sometimes they don’t even find technicalities, they just do it, relying on their own reputation and your ignorance. The fact that one has to learn to do an end run around them and engage in wiki politics, hell, essentially learn an entire second legal system, to “have the truth prevail” for even a minor fact with citation is exhausting. It filters out good potential editors who nonetheless have no time to engage in the behind-the-scenes drama proceedings. It’s not like this hasn’t been a known issue for years now.
antidote101@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Yeah, but like with anything in life - if you keep encountering the same problem over and over again, you should probably consider your own approach to be a factor in the process.
So sure, there probably are vindictive editors, but if it’s a reoccurring theme, then something else might be at fault.