All I said is that the wiki way works, that's all. You can't hide it when
someone tries to take over a project, and that is the reason we shouldn't
try to anticipate that with convoluted strategies. "Assume Good Faith" will
always win out over any strange misguided takeover strategy, which is why
governments that intend to do such things choose nowadays to just block
wikimedia altogether. It is not our wake-up call to take, but that of the
Kazakh people.

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Risker <> wrote:

> On 28 December 2015 at 11:22, Jane Darnell <> wrote:
> > Anyone can exploit the content on WMF for their needs. What I mean by "it
> > works" is that you can't fool people when you try to change Wikipedia to
> > fit government policy. We can easily identify problematic edits. Never
> > underestimate the diaspora of any country. Wikimedia is always bigger
> than
> > any one government will ever estimate.
> >
> >
> Well, yes, anyone can exploit the content of WMF projects; we don't usually
> give them kudos for doing so, though.  And you most certainly CAN fool
> people when you change Wikipedia to change government policy, if the
> government overwhelms a small "traditional" Wikipedia community with
> bribes, threats to well-being and good old fashioned paid editing.  The
> Wikipedia brand is perceived to be independent from such influences; that
> it isn't in this case (and who knows how many other cases) cannot be
> perceived by readers who do not have any alternative resources.
> Small communities with less than 50 active editors can be pretty easily
> swamped; a university class adding valuable, well sourced and researched
> content may have a positive effect, just as focused addition of heavily
> biased material by "editing for reward" (rewards including payment, gifts,
> or simply not being incarcerated) can turn a Wikipedia into a platform for
> third parties.    This particular project was an easy target, and there are
> many others that could similarly be overwhelmed.  We need to recognize that
> most of the world does not live under the conditions that encourage or even
> permit the development of freely available information. As a global
> community we need to stop pretending that the example of Kazakh Wikipedia
> is not a major and significant bellwether that requires very serious review
> of how we encourage and  develop projects centered in countries with
> repressive regimes.  Many of these regions are areas with significant
> potential for growth of our content - the major focus of the mission of the
> Wikimedia Foundation.  Figuring out how to grow these projects within the
> founding principles is not just important, it's necessary.
> Risker/Anne
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> New messages to:
> Unsubscribe:,
> <>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
New messages to:

Reply via email to