Name: Anonymous 2018-01-22 14:32
https://github.com/saniv/text/blob/master/wikipedia-corruption.txt
Wikipedia Corruption: Avoid Donating to Wikimedia Foundation
Unfortunately Wikipedia now serves as a propaganda platform to various non-free governments. Dissident opinion is suppressed, while sources, like RussiaToday, are endlessly cited. People questioning this practice get instant bans, without any explanation. Fastest way to find oneself banned at Wikipedia is to edit a politically charged article, which is paid for by some government or organization. Insiders tell that Jimmy Wales receives direct payments from interested parties, wishing to maintain control over what gets published. I will describe my own experience editing a Wikipedia article at its Russian language part, provide a few examples of how dissidents get silenced, then I will point other problems with the site.
Tired of Russian government propaganda on Wikipedia, I registered there and tried to challenging the edit of a well-known propagandist, who is also the unspoken manager of Russian Wikipedia. The result was predictable: almost instantly I was blocked indefinitely, without any reason, warning and discussion, after my first and single edit, removing the false and islamophobic assessment of the "Islamic terrorist" in the article about the hero of the Chechen people - Amir Khattab. People responsible for Wikipedia simply refused to discuss the reasons for the ban and the possibility of unblocking me. After my ban, a new lie was immediately added to the article, groundlessly stating that Khattab is an "Arab mercenary", although Khattab is a Circassian, whose ancestors fled from the Russians from the Caucasus where the Russians committed the genocide of Circassians. Khattab, at the call of the heart, fought for the idea and freedom of the fraternal Caucasus people from the Russians, first in Afghanistan, where the Russians unceremoniously invaded, then in Chechnya, which Russians attacked like a pack of plague ravens on the eagle. In Wikipedia I was banned, judging from the discussion, by obvious hurray-patriots, whose personal pages are filled with St. George ribbons (a neo-nazi symbol, Russian equivalent of American Confederate flag), orthodox icons and plaques, like "Born in the USSR." There is an obvious conflict of interest. It's not for these Russian imperialists to judge Khattab, Bandera or any other national separatist.
Amir Khattab did not engage in terrorism or harmed civilians, he fought exclusively with the invading Russian military forces. But Russians meanly slandered the freedom fighter. Terrorism is when some Charlie Hebdo is blown up for funny pictures, and not when you reflect the attack of a drunk Russian soldier, armed to the teeth, who came to the lands of your ancestors at the order of Kremlin. The so-called "Chechen terrorism" is just a provocation by the FSB, which was tasked with getting an excuse to seize Chechen land. So the Russians themselves blew up their commie-blocks (just google "Ryazan Sugar"), accusing the Chechens of this, just as Stalin rigged Kirov's murder, accusing his political opponents. In addition, after publishing a sketch version of this research in Russian, I began receiving threats that Kadyrovtsy would now kill me. Ramzan Kadyrov, a Kremlin prostitute, bears anti-Semitic nonsense about Khattab, stating that "Khattab is a Jew and his daughter is Sarah." All of Russia is made up of such frank cynical lies. Chechen people themselves call Kadyrov "Kafirov" (from the word "Kafir" - traitor), for the fact that the Kadyrov clan cooperated with the KGB even during the Soviet Union and sold their people to the Russians for money and the patronage of the Kremlin.
In 2008, in the context of the war with Georgia, the Russians began to massively change in all articles the name "Tskhinvali" to "Tskhinval", leaving edit war as winners, although historically they always wrote with "i". Similarly, in the context of the war with Ukraine, the Russians are massively replacing "in Ukraine" with the phrase "on Ukraine," thus emphasizing that Ukraine is just a territory, and not an independent country, and therefore it can be annexed with impunity. Purely Russian pettiness, crossed with ostentatious grandeur.
By writing to info@wikimedia.org, I received the official reply from the Wikimedia Foundation:
"we can not deal with queries about the Russian Wikipedia,
since each version has its own rules and policies "
- Lawrence Devereaux
It turns out that the Russian part of Wikipedia is completely controlled by Russian government, and the Wikimedia Foundation does not answer for it. I was redirected to the Russians at info-ru@wikimedia.org, where, in spite of my question asked in English and the request to reply also in English (I don't speak Russian, could you please reply in English?), some Oleg Dogadin boldly responded in Russian:
"Статьи в Википедии пишутся ... на основе информации из авторитетных источников,
не зависимо, положительная или отрицательная информация о герое"
- Oleg Dogadin
Thus, the representative of Wikipedia subscribed to the fact that obvious pro-Kremlin sources like RussiaToday are authoritative enough to constitute one-sided insulting judgment about the person who fought for the independence of his people from Russia, and the principle of NPoV can be neglected when it is convenient for propaganda.
In addition, Russian government operates the so-called "Virtual Front" at Wikipedia, whose official task is
"to fill the often used Internet resource "Wikipedia" full and truthful
information about the achievements and exploits of the Russian people."
- http://www.bbc.com/russian/features-38996007
Patriotic participants of the Russian Wikipedia comment on this:
"If these frontline soldiers write articles ... then it's fine ... the content will not be superfluous."
Employees of such "Fronts" are creating politically biased articles, similar to the article about Amir Khattab in Wikipedia, removing any information contradicting Russian censorship. For example, in the Russian version of the article on the capture of Russian Siberia, there is no mention of the genocide of the Siberian people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_conquest_of_Siberia#Massacres_of_indigenous_peoples
Among Russian Wikipedia users and admins, homophobia and sexism are rampant. For example, absent in other languages, the article "Homonegativism" (Гомонегативизм), which quotes homophobes, like the Russian sexologist M. Beylkin, who insists on the compulsory treatment of gays and the change of their orientation to heterosexual. Among the sexists was a member of the Union of Writers of the Russian Federation, Nikolai Eikhvald, who opposed the holding of the women's wiki-marathon. And on the justified statement of the fact of sexism on Wikipedia, from Russians there comes a brash shameless answer "why journalists support this nonsense about sexism", implying apparently some conspiracy theory aimed at destroying their patriarchal little world in which Russians can get drunk and beat their wives with impunity. On attempts by women to investigate the subject of longstanding discrimination, the Russians state that "gender studies are quackery and pseudoscience", further harshly hinting that the articles written by women "deserve nothing but criticism." Then Russians don't hesitate to point out the "proper" woman's place: "after all, a man usually kills mammoths, and the woman cooks them and sits with children." After that go nasty sexist jokes about "Systemic deviations caused by the centuries-old oppression of women". [1]
After I made my blocking public, the administrators of Russian Wikipedia began helpless justification that there is the so-called "The three-revert rule" - "An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page—whether involving the same or different material—within a 24-hour period. Violations of the rule often attract blocks of at least 24 hours." However, I made only two reverts (certainly not more than three) and Russians blocked me permanently (rather than for 24 hours), disabling even the ability to request an unblock. [2]
In response, the Russians continued to justify themselves that I am just a new user, immediately telling that according to Wikipedia rules "admins are stricter towards beginners than experienced participants", which fundamentally contradicts the fundamental principle of Wikipedia "Assume Good Faith", suggesting that beginners are treated with condescension, because beginner errors by default are not from evil. Thus, the Russians violate their own rules when it is profitable for propaganda, and of course they will not tolerate newcomers, especially if these "newcomers" are trying to question Russian propaganda, and the moderator is a member of the "Virtual Front", "born in the USSR", wearing St. George ribbons, thinking that gays should receive forced psychiatric treatment, and that the woman's place is "at the kitchen."
Losing argument Russian Wikipedia admins suddenly declared that I'm "just a socially inept idiot" and that "blocking you was completely justified", citing the example of a certain other user, Pavel Shekhtman, saying that Shekhtman is "opposition leader", yet forgetting to mention that Shekhtman is a puppet of the Kremlin, playing the role of the controlled opposition, and Shekhtman's edits do not contradict the official policy of Russia, or are aimed at minimizing damage when it is impossible to hide some problem.
Learning that I published this research on my personal page in the English-language Wikipedia, the Russians started global campaign against me, demanded the global administrators of the Wikimedia Foundation to block me on all Wikimedia sites. [3]
To the credit of the Western moderators, they only suppressed my personal page, allegedly because it disclosed someone's personal information, not satisfying the request for global block on me.
I asked for a comment on this text on the official IRC channel of Russian Wikipedia (#wikipedia-ru), the answer was received from the administrator of this channel and the oldest participant of Russian Wikipedia, a certain Sergey Kukovlev, who stated that my claims were "хуита" (fucked bullshit), then Kukovlev falled into homophobia about "faggots" "who had the audacity to translate into Russian articles about US politicians who are gay", giving a link to his blog [4]. In other words, Russian community at Wikipedia is not capable of anything more than homophobia and rudeness with swearing and insults.
Administration of Russian Wikipedia is very biased. The members of administration are often employees of state institutions. So Sergei Ilyinykh (Wulfson) - the main administrator and the acknowledged unspoken owner of the Russian part of Wikipedia, bears an officer rank (real one, in Russian army), is a military interpreter by profession and for a long time worked as a chief in the military office (hence KGB informer), in his own words. Ilyinykh created the article "Russophobia," exposing the enemies of the Russian people, and the stigma of "terrorists" for the Caucasian separatists, for trying to challenge which Ilyinykh gives permanent ban. The essence of Sergei Ilyinykh as a propagandist is well manifested in the discussion of the same article about Amir Khattab, where the Ilyinykh fully argue in the vein of the official Kremlin rhetoric, supplying it as the opinion of "Russian society", which in realy was against the annexation of Chechnya.
Wikipedia Corruption: Avoid Donating to Wikimedia Foundation
Unfortunately Wikipedia now serves as a propaganda platform to various non-free governments. Dissident opinion is suppressed, while sources, like RussiaToday, are endlessly cited. People questioning this practice get instant bans, without any explanation. Fastest way to find oneself banned at Wikipedia is to edit a politically charged article, which is paid for by some government or organization. Insiders tell that Jimmy Wales receives direct payments from interested parties, wishing to maintain control over what gets published. I will describe my own experience editing a Wikipedia article at its Russian language part, provide a few examples of how dissidents get silenced, then I will point other problems with the site.
Tired of Russian government propaganda on Wikipedia, I registered there and tried to challenging the edit of a well-known propagandist, who is also the unspoken manager of Russian Wikipedia. The result was predictable: almost instantly I was blocked indefinitely, without any reason, warning and discussion, after my first and single edit, removing the false and islamophobic assessment of the "Islamic terrorist" in the article about the hero of the Chechen people - Amir Khattab. People responsible for Wikipedia simply refused to discuss the reasons for the ban and the possibility of unblocking me. After my ban, a new lie was immediately added to the article, groundlessly stating that Khattab is an "Arab mercenary", although Khattab is a Circassian, whose ancestors fled from the Russians from the Caucasus where the Russians committed the genocide of Circassians. Khattab, at the call of the heart, fought for the idea and freedom of the fraternal Caucasus people from the Russians, first in Afghanistan, where the Russians unceremoniously invaded, then in Chechnya, which Russians attacked like a pack of plague ravens on the eagle. In Wikipedia I was banned, judging from the discussion, by obvious hurray-patriots, whose personal pages are filled with St. George ribbons (a neo-nazi symbol, Russian equivalent of American Confederate flag), orthodox icons and plaques, like "Born in the USSR." There is an obvious conflict of interest. It's not for these Russian imperialists to judge Khattab, Bandera or any other national separatist.
Amir Khattab did not engage in terrorism or harmed civilians, he fought exclusively with the invading Russian military forces. But Russians meanly slandered the freedom fighter. Terrorism is when some Charlie Hebdo is blown up for funny pictures, and not when you reflect the attack of a drunk Russian soldier, armed to the teeth, who came to the lands of your ancestors at the order of Kremlin. The so-called "Chechen terrorism" is just a provocation by the FSB, which was tasked with getting an excuse to seize Chechen land. So the Russians themselves blew up their commie-blocks (just google "Ryazan Sugar"), accusing the Chechens of this, just as Stalin rigged Kirov's murder, accusing his political opponents. In addition, after publishing a sketch version of this research in Russian, I began receiving threats that Kadyrovtsy would now kill me. Ramzan Kadyrov, a Kremlin prostitute, bears anti-Semitic nonsense about Khattab, stating that "Khattab is a Jew and his daughter is Sarah." All of Russia is made up of such frank cynical lies. Chechen people themselves call Kadyrov "Kafirov" (from the word "Kafir" - traitor), for the fact that the Kadyrov clan cooperated with the KGB even during the Soviet Union and sold their people to the Russians for money and the patronage of the Kremlin.
In 2008, in the context of the war with Georgia, the Russians began to massively change in all articles the name "Tskhinvali" to "Tskhinval", leaving edit war as winners, although historically they always wrote with "i". Similarly, in the context of the war with Ukraine, the Russians are massively replacing "in Ukraine" with the phrase "on Ukraine," thus emphasizing that Ukraine is just a territory, and not an independent country, and therefore it can be annexed with impunity. Purely Russian pettiness, crossed with ostentatious grandeur.
By writing to info@wikimedia.org, I received the official reply from the Wikimedia Foundation:
"we can not deal with queries about the Russian Wikipedia,
since each version has its own rules and policies "
- Lawrence Devereaux
It turns out that the Russian part of Wikipedia is completely controlled by Russian government, and the Wikimedia Foundation does not answer for it. I was redirected to the Russians at info-ru@wikimedia.org, where, in spite of my question asked in English and the request to reply also in English (I don't speak Russian, could you please reply in English?), some Oleg Dogadin boldly responded in Russian:
"Статьи в Википедии пишутся ... на основе информации из авторитетных источников,
не зависимо, положительная или отрицательная информация о герое"
- Oleg Dogadin
Thus, the representative of Wikipedia subscribed to the fact that obvious pro-Kremlin sources like RussiaToday are authoritative enough to constitute one-sided insulting judgment about the person who fought for the independence of his people from Russia, and the principle of NPoV can be neglected when it is convenient for propaganda.
In addition, Russian government operates the so-called "Virtual Front" at Wikipedia, whose official task is
"to fill the often used Internet resource "Wikipedia" full and truthful
information about the achievements and exploits of the Russian people."
- http://www.bbc.com/russian/features-38996007
Patriotic participants of the Russian Wikipedia comment on this:
"If these frontline soldiers write articles ... then it's fine ... the content will not be superfluous."
Employees of such "Fronts" are creating politically biased articles, similar to the article about Amir Khattab in Wikipedia, removing any information contradicting Russian censorship. For example, in the Russian version of the article on the capture of Russian Siberia, there is no mention of the genocide of the Siberian people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_conquest_of_Siberia#Massacres_of_indigenous_peoples
Among Russian Wikipedia users and admins, homophobia and sexism are rampant. For example, absent in other languages, the article "Homonegativism" (Гомонегативизм), which quotes homophobes, like the Russian sexologist M. Beylkin, who insists on the compulsory treatment of gays and the change of their orientation to heterosexual. Among the sexists was a member of the Union of Writers of the Russian Federation, Nikolai Eikhvald, who opposed the holding of the women's wiki-marathon. And on the justified statement of the fact of sexism on Wikipedia, from Russians there comes a brash shameless answer "why journalists support this nonsense about sexism", implying apparently some conspiracy theory aimed at destroying their patriarchal little world in which Russians can get drunk and beat their wives with impunity. On attempts by women to investigate the subject of longstanding discrimination, the Russians state that "gender studies are quackery and pseudoscience", further harshly hinting that the articles written by women "deserve nothing but criticism." Then Russians don't hesitate to point out the "proper" woman's place: "after all, a man usually kills mammoths, and the woman cooks them and sits with children." After that go nasty sexist jokes about "Systemic deviations caused by the centuries-old oppression of women". [1]
After I made my blocking public, the administrators of Russian Wikipedia began helpless justification that there is the so-called "The three-revert rule" - "An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page—whether involving the same or different material—within a 24-hour period. Violations of the rule often attract blocks of at least 24 hours." However, I made only two reverts (certainly not more than three) and Russians blocked me permanently (rather than for 24 hours), disabling even the ability to request an unblock. [2]
In response, the Russians continued to justify themselves that I am just a new user, immediately telling that according to Wikipedia rules "admins are stricter towards beginners than experienced participants", which fundamentally contradicts the fundamental principle of Wikipedia "Assume Good Faith", suggesting that beginners are treated with condescension, because beginner errors by default are not from evil. Thus, the Russians violate their own rules when it is profitable for propaganda, and of course they will not tolerate newcomers, especially if these "newcomers" are trying to question Russian propaganda, and the moderator is a member of the "Virtual Front", "born in the USSR", wearing St. George ribbons, thinking that gays should receive forced psychiatric treatment, and that the woman's place is "at the kitchen."
Losing argument Russian Wikipedia admins suddenly declared that I'm "just a socially inept idiot" and that "blocking you was completely justified", citing the example of a certain other user, Pavel Shekhtman, saying that Shekhtman is "opposition leader", yet forgetting to mention that Shekhtman is a puppet of the Kremlin, playing the role of the controlled opposition, and Shekhtman's edits do not contradict the official policy of Russia, or are aimed at minimizing damage when it is impossible to hide some problem.
Learning that I published this research on my personal page in the English-language Wikipedia, the Russians started global campaign against me, demanded the global administrators of the Wikimedia Foundation to block me on all Wikimedia sites. [3]
To the credit of the Western moderators, they only suppressed my personal page, allegedly because it disclosed someone's personal information, not satisfying the request for global block on me.
I asked for a comment on this text on the official IRC channel of Russian Wikipedia (#wikipedia-ru), the answer was received from the administrator of this channel and the oldest participant of Russian Wikipedia, a certain Sergey Kukovlev, who stated that my claims were "хуита" (fucked bullshit), then Kukovlev falled into homophobia about "faggots" "who had the audacity to translate into Russian articles about US politicians who are gay", giving a link to his blog [4]. In other words, Russian community at Wikipedia is not capable of anything more than homophobia and rudeness with swearing and insults.
Administration of Russian Wikipedia is very biased. The members of administration are often employees of state institutions. So Sergei Ilyinykh (Wulfson) - the main administrator and the acknowledged unspoken owner of the Russian part of Wikipedia, bears an officer rank (real one, in Russian army), is a military interpreter by profession and for a long time worked as a chief in the military office (hence KGB informer), in his own words. Ilyinykh created the article "Russophobia," exposing the enemies of the Russian people, and the stigma of "terrorists" for the Caucasian separatists, for trying to challenge which Ilyinykh gives permanent ban. The essence of Sergei Ilyinykh as a propagandist is well manifested in the discussion of the same article about Amir Khattab, where the Ilyinykh fully argue in the vein of the official Kremlin rhetoric, supplying it as the opinion of "Russian society", which in realy was against the annexation of Chechnya.