Wikimedia: Difference between revisions
specific problems created directly by policies of "Wikimedia foundation"
m (moving wikipedia specific critisism to Wikipedia) |
(specific problems created directly by policies of "Wikimedia foundation") |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
Many longstanding participants in the [[Wikipedia]] project have serious problems with the people and processes employed by the '''Foundation'''. As a volunteer organization, it probably has growing pains, and it's unclear if it will outgrow these, gain an [[independent board]], or other attributes of a responsible nonprofit. Most of the criticisms have to do with [[wiki management]] problems on which there is little well-understood practice. | Many longstanding participants in the [[Wikipedia]] project have serious problems with the people and processes employed by the '''Foundation'''. As a volunteer organization, it probably has growing pains, and it's unclear if it will outgrow these, gain an [[independent board]], or other attributes of a responsible nonprofit. Most of the criticisms have to do with [[wiki management]] problems on which there is little well-understood practice. | ||
Specific issues on which the "'''Foundation'''" has taken positions favourable to [[Bomis.com]] or detrimental to the [[GFDL text corpus]] as a whole: | |||
*Refusing to release [[Most Clicked Links]] information on any [[Wikipedia]], even the small ones, where tracking this information would be quite simple, and would assist authors in supporting real end user interests. It appears that this information is withheld specifically for the use of Bomis' search engine development. | |||
*Releasing only very limited page visit information - likewise of much use to Bomis internally. | |||
*Including self-serving claims regarding a nonexistent requirement to "link back to [[Wikipedia]]" when [[GFDL]]'d materials that have appeared there are quoted. The [[GFDL]] has no such requirement but the [[XML dump]]s from [[Mediawiki]] add language that implies that it does. In fact, the GFDL | |||
*Not supporting the default [[standard wiki URI]] that [[Wikipedia]] itself uses, in [[Mediawiki]] releases to other parties. This makes the URIs of non-Wikipedia pages more difficult to remember and impossible to recall offhand, and shifting with each mediawiki release. Since Wikipedia's don't likewise shift, this makes it almost certain that Wikipedia pages will be linked to, not those other pages. | |||
*Treating use of [[ISO language code]]s in [[mediawiki]]'s [[interwiki link standard|interwiki link conventions]] as if they are invocations of Wikipedia in that language, not simply references to "that page in that language". | |||
*Banning, harassing, [[outing|attempting to "out"]] and permitting (if not deliberately attempting) [[framing]] users who point out any of the above. This sometimes reaches the bizarre extreme of [[echo chamber]] assertions being cited in Wikipedia articles as if they were true. | |||
*Promoting its own [[community point of view]] as if it were actually a [[neutral point of view]], ignoring [[systemic bias]] questions, and letting [[sysop vigilantiism]] and [[sysop vandalism]] occur freely against outsiders. This sometimes reaches the bizarre extremes of assuming that the '''Wikipedia mailing list''' consensus on legal issues overrules the best legal advice of actual qualified legal experts (witness James Day and Jimbo Wales debating). | |||
It is a classic [[insider culture]]. It is not a good model for [[Consumerium Governance Organization]] or any other nonprofit entity that is actually trying to serve users and disadvantaged people and other living things. | |||