Claims of corruption: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
(the link transit progress shows that documenting these issues can result in some progress - it is neither axiomatic that Wikimedia is corrupt nor inevitable, let these issues stand for resolution)
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
'''N.B. there are certain [[evil trolls]] who assert that Wikimedia may not be corrupt.  Take care while reading this page to not fall prey to their [[propaganda]].'''
[[[[Wikipedia]] is the largest [[GFDL corpus access provider]].  It was [[usurper|usurped]] by [[Wikimedia]] in 2003.  Since then it has been '''alleged''' to have become increasingly corrupt and unresponsive to contributors and users.  Evidence of '''Wikimedia corruption''' includes:
[[[[Wikipedia]] is the largest [[GFDL corpus access provider]].  It was [[usurper|usurped]] by [[Wikimedia]] in 2003.  Since then it has been '''alleged''' to have become increasingly corrupt and unresponsive to contributors and users.  Evidence of '''Wikimedia corruption''' includes:


9

edits