Just one example from my own reporting of basic facts any voter has a right to know, but someone reading Wikipedia will not, because it was erased from her page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Julia_Salazar&oldid=904362771 …https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/julia-salazar-arrested-2011 …
-
-
Show this thread
-
I recommend checking out the history & talk pages for NY State Senator Julia Salazar's Wikipedia page to see how a politician's lies and criminal history, reported everywhere from the New York Times to NY Mag to Vox, can be systematically erased by ideologically inclined editors.https://twitter.com/Yair_Rosenberg/status/1410254381849755650 …
Show this thread -
Like, Salazar is probably the most nationally-covered NY state senator in history thanks to her weird scandals! It's all over the press, and it's obviously notable. The only reason it's not on her Wikipedia page is b/c certain folks editing it don't want people to know about it.https://twitter.com/Yair_Rosenberg/status/1413505723993108483 …
Show this thread -
There's one Wikipedia editor who has been sanitizing Salazar's page since *2018*, before she was even elected. Back then, another editor wrote a long note pleading with them to knock it off. The other editor didn't respond and has kept up their censorship: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:JesseRafe#Julia_Salazar …https://twitter.com/Yair_Rosenberg/status/1413509315143471105 …
Show this thread -
Anyway, this is less interesting to me on its own given the relative insignificance of the subject, but it does give you a window into why Wikipedia is often less reliable on partisan political subjects than other topics. It's happening on much more important pages than this.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
More people need to know about the disservice done by biased Wikipedia editors. They are worse than biased journos because on the surface they aren’t even identified, so there is little to no social pressure or blowback when they purposefully omit information.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
People do know that Wikipedia is editable, right? And that the version history of articles is available? I'm not saying that information doesn't get disputed, revised, and/or scrubbed, but it's not exactly a secret conspiracy. If you have the info, why not just set it right?
-
Yeah, my exact point is that this information *was* on her page, and then there was clearly a concerted effort over time to remove, misrepresent, or downplay it. If the issue was just adding it to the page, it'd still be there, as it was before: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Julia_Salazar&oldid=904362771 …
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
The Talk page for her article is a shit show. Honestly for really controversial figures the Talk page is usually better than the actual article
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Should be added right back!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.