←back to thread

Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

(www.washingtonpost.com)
754 points coloneltcb | 1 comments | 25 Apr 25 23:03 UTC | HN request time: 0.203s | source
Show context
sedev ◴[26 Apr 25 03:04 UTC] No.43800538[source]▶
I am going to say a thing I say a lot: please edit Wikipedia. It is easier to do than you probably think! Wikipedia's biggest constraint is no longer money or server space, it's editor time (especially since LLM-based garbage is a force multiplier on disruptive editing that does not have a corresponding improvement to good-faith editing). Any topic area you know about and/or care about can benefit from your attention. Fixing typos is valuable. Adding photos is valuable. Flagging vandalism is valuable. Please edit Wikipedia.
replies(23): >>43800548 #>>43800561 #>>43800562 #>>43800627 #>>43800656 #>>43800869 #>>43800924 #>>43800973 #>>43801067 #>>43801176 #>>43801349 #>>43801481 #>>43801492 #>>43801580 #>>43801831 #>>43801854 #>>43801895 #>>43801972 #>>43801986 #>>43802252 #>>43802417 #>>43803156 #>>43804597 #
j4coh ◴[26 Apr 25 06:16 UTC] No.43801349[source]▶
I’ve tried, but every article even the most inconsequential seems to have an angry bird in the roost enforcing whatever their particular vision of the article is.
replies(2): >>43801368 #>>43801374 #
1. Hamuko ◴[26 Apr 25 06:22 UTC] No.43801368[source]▶
It's even worse when you add a source and you get reverted for reasons quite clearly disproven in your source. I had to make a single edit three times because it got undone twice by two separate administrators. A less stubborn person would've just given up on the first baseless revert and never edited Wikipedia again.