Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2023-05-22/In the media
Article display preview: | This is a draft of a potential Signpost article, and should not be interpreted as a finished piece. Its content is subject to review by the editorial team and ultimately by JPxG, the editor in chief. Please do not link to this draft as it is unfinished and the URL will change upon publication. If you would like to contribute and are familiar with the requirements of a Signpost article, feel free to be bold in making improvements!
|
History, propaganda and censorship
Wikipedia's World War II controversy attracts comments from opposing scholars
Scholars from both sides of the scholarly debate around World War II and the history of Jews in Poland are unhappy with Wikipedia this week.
Shira Klein, co-author with Jan Grabowski of the paper that triggered the arbitration case on this topic area, slammed the Arbitration Committee's decision even before the case officially concluded, saying in a press release by Chapman University that the "Ruling on Wikipedia's Distortion of Holocaust History Lacks Depth". While the release acknowledges that the ruling involves a topic ban of "two distortionist editors" (appealable in 12 months), Klein argues that these "remedies lack depth and consequence," and that "[b]y ignoring the egregiously false content our article flagged for them, and focusing only on editors’ conduct (e.g. uncivil language), Wikipedia has once again failed, and miserably so." Fundamentally, she holds that ArbCom was ill-equipped to deal with the problem: "[Arbitrators] have zero content expertise, so they have no idea when an editor is spinning lies. More than that: They are bound by Wiki policy to steer clear of content. ArbCom was simply the wrong solution to begin with. What they should have done, which some editors suggested, was to ask historians for help."
Meanwhile, Richard C. Lukas, one of the scholars criticised in Grabowski and Klein's essay, published an editorial in the May–June issue Polish American Journal, titled "Is it History or Propaganda?". Lukas relates that after he had been "informed by interested friendly sources of the changes in my Wikipedia biography" (that had been prompted by the essay), "[m]y belief that the editors of Wikipedia genuinely tried to be fair and balanced in their presentations has been seriously shaken." However, he argues that "The larger issue is not Wikipedia but the hijacking of Polish wartime history by a group of Jewish historians who, in this post-fact world, seem more interested in exaggeration and hyperbole than in facts and analysis."
Whatever the merits and demerits of their respective arguments, it seems certain that Wikipedia will never be able to satisfy everyone. – AK, H
In brief
- Legal maneuvers against Indian censorship: Further developments in the Indian court case about the documentary India: The Modi Question (see previous Signpost coverage): In reactions to a May 3 summons by an Indian court, the Wikimedia Foundation and BBC said they had not been served properly under the Hague Service Convention, and refused to accept service at the court, as they were appearing "under protest". The third foreign organization summoned, the Internet Archive, advised the court that it had already removed links to the BBC documentary (back in January, it reported having done so due to DMCA takedown requests from the BBC itself). Reports by ANI News and Times of India.
- Twitter censorship: Elon Musk, the Twitter boss, finds himself in hot water over censoring tweets in Turkey. Facing criticism, Musk defended his decision by saying it was either partial censorship or a complete Twitter blackout in Turkey. Meanwhile, Wikipedia's Jimmy Wales chimed in, proudly boasting how they fought Turkey all the way to the Supreme Court and emerged victorious. It seems even in the battle of censorship, Musk and Wales are tweeting from different playbooks! Reports by Fortune and Billings Gazette.
- How Kiwi comic got banned: Melanie Bracewell didn't get thrown off TV by dropping F-bombs on the broadcast of the Australian show The Project. She did say that she and her sister were banned from Wikipedia by re-writing the articles of minor celebrities in the first person, so as to make them appear to be autobiographies. (Video time code 3:55.)
- Techdirt on Chatbots: Techdirt reports that "Wikipedia Grapples With Chatbots: Should It Allow Their Use For Articles? Should It Allow Them To Train On Wikipedia?"
This page is a draft for the next issue of the Signpost. Below is some helpful code that will help you write and format a Signpost draft. If it's blank, you can fill out a template by copy-pasting this in and pressing 'publish changes': {{subst:Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Story-preload}}
Images and Galleries
|
---|
To put an image in your article, use the following template (link): This will create the file on the right. Keep the 300px in most cases. If writing a 'full width' article, change
Placing (link) will instead create an inline image like below [[File:|300px|center|alt=Placeholder alt text]]
To create a gallery, use the following to create |
Quotes
| |||
---|---|---|---|
To insert a framed quote like the one on the right, use this template (link): If writing a 'full width' article, change
To insert a pull quote like
use this template (link):
To insert a long inline quote like
use this template (link): |
Side frames
|
---|
Side frames help put content in sidebar vignettes. For instance, this one (link): gives the frame on the right. This is useful when you want to insert non-standard images, quotes, graphs, and the like.
For example, to insert the {{Graph:Chart}} generated by in a frame, simple put the graph code in to get the framed Graph:Chart on the right. If writing a 'full width' article, change |
Two-column vs full width styles
|
---|
If you keep the 'normal' preloaded draft and work from there, you will be using the two-column style. This is perfectly fine in most cases and you don't need to do anything. However, every time you have a However, you can also fine-tune which style is used at which point in an article. To switch from two-column → full width style midway in an article, insert where you want the switch to happen. To switch from full width → two-column style midway in an article, insert where you want the switch to happen. |
Article series
|
---|
To add a series of 'related articles' your article, use the following code or will create the sidebar on the right. If writing a 'full width' article, change Alternatively, you can use at the end of an article to create For more Signpost coverage on the visual editor see our visual editor series. If you think a topic would make a good series, but you don't see a tag for it, or that all the articles in a series seem 'old', ask for help at the WT:NEWSROOM. Many more tags exist, but they haven't been documented yet. |
Links and such
|
---|
By the way, the template that you're reading right now is {{Editnotices/Group/Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue}} (edit). A list of the preload templates for Signpost articles can be found here. |
Discuss this story
If there was a manual of style for the Signpost, perhaps I wouldn't be wondering why "chief executive officer" was capitalized, when it wouldn't be if either the Wikipedia or Associated Press style was adopted, for example.~TPW 13:27, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Holocaust / Poland arbitration case
Since we are linking to Richard C. Lukas for context information, and mention related changes to it, it is probably worth noting that right as the ArbCom case was being finalized and this Signpost story was being written, that article was significantly edited by one of the case parties, e.g. to remove the sentence "Several of his books have received criticism for downplaying antisemitism in wartime Poland and overstating the heroism of Poles in rescuing Jews during the war." Regards, HaeB (talk) 15:43, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I did some research on Worldcat that may be of interest. First, here are some data on Lukas:
Now for another author, Nechama Tec, who Grabowski and Klein mention approvingly in their essay:
As for Grabowski himself:
As I've mentioned before, Lukas' books are also prominently featured in bibliographies published by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum: [1], [2].
Judging by the above criteria, Grabowski looks junior to Lukas in terms of academic standing. Lukas looks about equal to Tec, who Grabowski and Klein mention as a bona fide Holocaust expert. --Andreas JN466 16:15, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Twitter/Turkey censorship
insert Virgin Elon vs Chad Jimmy meme here --Firestar464 (talk) 15:37, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I applaud Jimmy for pushing E.M. on this, and for highlighting our own principled stance. However, one should also be aware that:
censorregulator; making good on E.M.'s promise after he had been called out by Matthew Yglesias on a lack of "Twitter Files" about this. Although a Turkish activist called them out on *not* publishing the actual throttling threat that was imminent).Regards, HaeB (talk) 16:29, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Modi documentary
What's odd in the petitioner's claims against WMF as reported by ANI is that (among other things), it calls for WMF to . Unless the BBC free-licenses the documentary, Commons is not going to even start distributing it (not for longer than the few seconds it takes for speed deletion, anyway, I assume). As for the actual informational content, this is Streisand effect territory, and it's good that the 2002 Gujarat riots topic is returning to global attention.
Some of my ancient attempts at mediation and explaining NPOV prior to modern Wikipedia talk page style are the 2002-2003 Talk:2002 Gujarat riots/Archive 1 and 2003-2005 Talk:2002 Gujarat riots/Archive 2. By 2005-2006, Talk:2002 Gujarat riots/Archive 3, the number of South Asians (or others sufficiently interested) willing to edit and discuss edits for the article had grown enough that there was likely a sufficient variety of biases for NPOV to become stable and a good quality article emerge. A quick browse only shows minor issues, such as overcite to a long list of academic sources at the end of the lead. A good challenge now for people who work on promoting "good" and "featured" status for articles would be to see if the article can be brought to either status despite (or thanks to) the increased attention. It might not be too much work. Boud (talk) 21:34, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]