...The claim that this representes the users is probably not. See [[alleged Wikimedia corruption]] for more on this.
...[[sysop power structure]] and [[sysop vandalism]] and [[Wikipedia violates GFDL]] for more on these specific breaches of stewardship.
965 bytes (146 words) - 17:50, 6 September 2004
...on]] commenting on the [[libel pit]] and [[Wikipedia violates GFDL|rolling GFDL violation]] that is '''Wikipedia'''.
783 bytes (116 words) - 21:54, 9 September 2004
...ation]] there is no way to interpret such a use of funds as anything but [[Wikimedia corruption]], should it occur, advancing the interests of officers not that
...roperty (donated works of [[GFDL contributor]]s) with [[Wikipedia violates GFDL|no legal basis for claiming ownership or control]], it would seem quite dif
1 KB (224 words) - 22:55, 9 September 2004
...robably chosen from those most offensive to [[sysop power structure]] of [[Wikimedia]]; ''See [[Wikipedia (Reds)]] for why.''
..., and who have sworn an oath not ever to [[Wikipedia violates GFDL|violate GFDL for purposes for reinforcing a clique]].
2 KB (377 words) - 18:09, 9 September 2004
...mmons''' [[parametric license]] regime is a more flexible alternative to [[GFDL]]. Its [[nonprofit]] [http://creativecommons.org .org] was founded by [[La
...sa''' license is normally considered to be the closest equivalent to the [[GFDL]] used here at [[Consumerium:Itself]]. Some advocate dual-licensing open c
5 KB (760 words) - 16:43, 28 September 2004
...on political grounds - which have no status and are no excuse under the [[GFDL]].
*The claim that [[libel]] is propagated in the forums of [[Wikimedia]], which has taken no steps at all to prevent use of names of uninvolved or
2 KB (348 words) - 17:43, 9 September 2004
[[Wikimedia]] considers any discussion of [[alleged Wikimedia corruption]] to be propaganda, because, according to itself, it cannot po
...e.g. those that [[Wikipedia violates GFDL]] or others listed in [[alleged Wikimedia corruption]].
3 KB (432 words) - 08:14, 26 September 2004
'''Wikimedia Foundation''' is a private tax-exempt corporation ([[not-for-profit project
Generally, its critics point to Wikimedia as a classic [[insider culture]], and '''''not a good model''''' for [[Cons
10 KB (1,627 words) - 07:36, 13 July 2010
...]]. S/he has numerous times expressed fierce opposition to [[Wikipedia]]/[[Wikimedia]] and belittlement of the worthy accomplishements of Wikipedia as a fairly
==Claims concerning Wikipedia/Wikimedia==
18 KB (2,843 words) - 14:25, 29 September 2004
...lse or unsubstantiated''' based on what is cited here. They are [[alleged Wikimedia corruption]] issues that for some reason have been disputed or resolved or
==False claim: Wikimedia withholding Board Vote results is a sign of corruption==
18 KB (2,874 words) - 15:46, 28 September 2004