The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Russavia, Pricasso, Jimbo, and Commons
Michaeldsuarez
post Tue 25th June 2013, 2:33pm
Post #1


Über Member
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 562
Joined: Mon 9th Aug 2010, 7:51pm
From: New York, New York
Member No.: 24,428

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



The Daily Dot - How Wikimedia Commons became a massive amateur porn hub by Kevin Morris:

QUOTE
This day's painting was special, however. For one, the man commissioning the painting never revealed his real name. And rather than pay money directly, he suggested a trade: I'm going to write a Wikipedia article about you, he said, and you penis-paint the face of Jimmy Wales, the cofounder of the largest and most influential encyclopedia in the world. The painting would then be added to the article.

"I was surprised that someone would do an article on me," Pricasso told me. "I thought what the hell—I'd do it."

It took him 30 minutes.

Days later, a photograph of the painting, as well as an explicit making-of video, was uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, a media repository run by the Wikimedia Foundation, which also oversees Wikipedia. The entry launched a storm of controversy, precipitated by no less than Wales himself, who publicly declared the video a form of sexual harassment.

More troubling for the community: The Wikimedian who uploaded the video, Russavia, was an influential, eight-year veteran of the Foundation, who'd had several public clashes with Wales in recent months.

Was Russavia the same man who commissioned the painting, Wikipedians wondered? Was he seeking revenge on Wales? And if the founder of Wikipedia himself is powerless to stop sexual harassment on Wikimedia Commons, what hope do the rest of us have?


Feel free to discuss the article.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Retrospect
post Thu 27th June 2013, 5:01am
Post #2


Londoner born and bred
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 263
Joined: Wed 7th Dec 2011, 1:16pm
From: London
Member No.: 71,989

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



It's well known that Commons has been taken over by a load of shitheads who are so entrenched that even Jimbo tried and failed to do anything about it. Nor is there much doubt who the biggest shithead is on the site. The WMF really needs, for its own good, to ban him; do they have the guts?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Text
post Wed 10th July 2013, 9:24pm
Post #3


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 491
Joined: Sun 1st Nov 2009, 3:08pm
Member No.: 15,107



Internet is full of attention whores who will almost do anything to have a piece of article somewhere. Even if they're going to be slandered in it. It must be a pathological thing.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Detective
post Fri 12th July 2013, 7:50pm
Post #4


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 331
Joined: Thu 9th Dec 2010, 11:17am
Member No.: 35,179



QUOTE(Text @ Wed 10th July 2013, 10:24pm) *

Internet is full of attention whores who will almost do anything to have a piece of article somewhere. Even if they're going to be slandered in it. It must be a pathological thing.

That's what keeps Wikipedia going, really.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 27th 6 17, 7:14pm