←back to thread

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

(www.washingtonpost.com)
923 points coloneltcb | 1 comments | 25 Apr 25 23:03 UTC | HN request time: 1.599s | 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(33): >>43800548 #>>43800561 #>>43800562 #>>43800627 #>>43800656 #>>43800869 #>>43800924 #>>43800973 #>>43801067 #>>43801176 #>>43801349 #>>43801481 #>>43801492 #>>43801580 #>>43801831 #>>43801854 #>>43801895 #>>43801972 #>>43801986 #>>43802252 #>>43802417 #>>43803156 #>>43804597 #>>43806169 #>>43806198 #>>43806256 #>>43806358 #>>43806607 #>>43806723 #>>43807364 #>>43807423 #>>43811812 #>>43822115 #
1. ChrisMarshallNY ◴[26 Apr 25 21:35 UTC] No.43807423[source]▶
In the past, I have done so, and won't, again.

First, my (quite correct) edits in existing pages have been reversed within minutes. No explanation as to why (I assume because I was not "known" enough). I have heard this complaint numerous times.

Second, when I tried to create a page about a system that I had originally authored, has become a well-known, worldwide tool, managed by a large team that does not include me, the page was rejected. I think it was because I had been involved in the creation of the tool.

I decided that it wasn't worth it. I didn't get upset, but it was clear that my input wasn't wanted.