forgive me for being suspect about a random anti wikipedia website at a time when the right wing is spending billions to discredit and shut down wikipedia.
Another Wikipedia Admin Caught Making PR Edits
Submitted 5 days ago by cyrano@lemmy.dbzer0.com to technology@lemmy.world
https://wikipediocracy.com/another-indian-faker-teaches-wiki-pr/
Comments
cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 days ago
antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 days ago
The issue that the article raises is legitimate, but actually looking through their archives is baffling, they’re really just hellbent on criticising WP. One of their most read articles says Wikipedia should attract more female editors by reducing the anonymity on the site and making it more like a social media platform. What the hell? wikipediocracy.com/why-women-have-no-time-for-wik…
RebekahWSD@lemmy.world 4 days ago
Ah yes, I’d love people online to be positive I’m a woman and not just probably one! That would make me feel extremely safe! I am being extremely sarcastic!
skozzii@lemmy.ca 5 days ago
I like how you think …
SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 5 days ago
This is what the rich choose to do instead of compete in a free market
BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 4 days ago
Are you saying the article is false?
And do you think the right wing doesn’t spend any money to edit Wikipedia?
Sibbo@sopuli.xyz 5 days ago
After finishing the PhD, I got emails from people saying that for money they would manage a Wikipedia article for me. They said they had people in high places to make that my article communicates the right message.
Sibbo@sopuli.xyz 5 days ago
Dear …,
Have you ever wondered of having a Wikipedia page for yourself or your company? We can help you get a Wikipedia page for yourself or your brand.
Why have a Wikipedia page?
Google loves Wikipedia and as such ranks it high in search results. Wikipedia is
also the first place people go when they Google your name. By leveraging
Wikipedia, you can help control your Online Profile and present yourself to the
world. Usually Wikipedia only accepts pages on celebrities and famous companies,
if you are looking to get one for yourself, we can help you with that. Having a page
for yourself in Wikipedia, brings you more credibility and makes you more
famous.
We have been editing on Wikipedia for 9+ years and We’ve created tons of pages
for companies, people, brands, products, and of course for academic purposes as
well.
We own multiple accounts on Wikipedia with page curation and new page
reviewer rights, so we can create and moderate pages with almost zero risk of
another mod taking it down.
There are few Wikipedia editors who are willing to create a page for money, and
most of them are scared to offer this service directly, so they do it through their
trusted sellers who mark up the price to $1500 - $2500 per page.
Because you’re buying directly from an experienced Wikipedia editor and mod,
you’ll get your page a lot cheaper, faster and with more reliability.
Let me know if you are interested.
RegardsJayGray91@lemmy.zip 5 days ago
I’m surprised and not surprised I guess that there’s a business offering to write Wikipedia articles like this. I suppose it’s naivety to think that Wikipedia articles are written with good intentions.
neidu3@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
For some reason they didn’t reach out to me after I received my doctorate in Geopsychology at Abide University…
Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 5 days ago
If the information on the page is accurate, what exactly is the issue here?
VintageGenious@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
What does the PR acronym stand for ?
lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 5 days ago
- Roman people
- pull request
- parliamentary report
- press release
- prize ring
- proportional representation
- Puerto Rico
- Permanent Resident
- Progress Report
- Pressure Regulator
- Park Ridge
- Pattern Recognition
- PageRank
- Planning and Responsibility
- Performance Review
- Performance Rating
- Problem Report
- Papa Roach
- Personal Record
- Peer Review
- ⁝
cyrano@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 days ago
VintageGenious@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
Thanks !
kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 days ago
It only takes a single incident like this for people to completely loose trust in Wikipedia, granted Wikipedia was already put to an insanely unreasonable standard.
orcrist@lemm.ee 4 days ago
Of course that’s not true. A single incident on a massive website like this is not going to force people who actually trusted Wikipedia before to stop trusting it in the future.
kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 days ago
Not really, but I am sick and tired of Wikipedia haters constantly using every tiny mistake to prove “Wikipedia cant be trusted”. Granted they still use the age old lie of “anyone can edit it” and “nobody moderates it”.
Valmond@lemmy.world 5 days ago
Tried to add that the (two) famous classic swedish films “sälskaps resan 1 & 2” were copies of the french Les Bronzés, and remove the “is on DVD for exceptionnally cheap”.
Got reverted after like 1 minute.
Tried a bunch of times, complaints to no avail.
Some years later I tried again but you could no longer make changes IIRC.
Just checked, info still missing.
jaybone@lemmy.zip 5 days ago
They should recruit more Reddit mods.
technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 days ago
Pretty sure wikipedia is just a compendium of PR posts.
pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
Do not go after Wikipedia because of one or two shitty people. We need it as a country. I would argue that the world needs it. Make it better and support it while calling out the shitty stuff, don’t take it down.
angrystego@lemmy.world 5 days ago
Do go for the shitty admins with no mercy though. We don’t need Wiki to slowly rot from the inside.
dulce_3t_decorum_3st@lemmy.world 5 days ago
We need it as a world.
yggstyle@lemmy.world 5 days ago
Agreed. Especially in times like these - having a free and open source of information is incredibly important.
VintageGenious@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
Why do US citizens think everyone on the internet is from their country ?
BakedCatboy@lemmy.ml 5 days ago
What part of their comment assumes that everyone else is from their country? I only see them referring to themselves and their own country.
yggstyle@lemmy.world 5 days ago
While, surely, OP was speaking English - given the world state why did you immediately jump to the conclusion that the country being referred to was the US? Yes - the statement wasn’t broad enough to perhaps include you but it wasn’t narrow or hateful in its intent. People (broad statement, including you) need to maybe find some chill and perhaps look for common ground rather than constantly being pedantic cunts. There were a variety of ways to approach that statement without being a twat… so kudos for just going for it - most people would have more tact.
roofuskit@lemmy.world 5 days ago
Why are non-americans so fucking pretentious on the Internet?
Gibibit@lemmy.world 5 days ago
The article is about protecting the integrity of Wikipedia from admins with ulterior motives. Regardless of the correctness of the article, “going after Wikipedia to take it down” does not describe the topic in the slightest. Why does this have so many upvotes? Are any of you even reading the linked article?
pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
I was going off the comments in this thread at the time. The right wants wikipedia to go away.
VintageGenious@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
To answer your question, It is safe to assume most people read the title and the abstract but don’t actually read the article
BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 4 days ago
What the world needs, what you need as a country, is for people to be a bit more discerning and conscious about the reliability of what they read online, and that includes not treating Wikipedia like holy scripture in the way that far too many people do.