Italian Wikipedia blocks all access Options

[Adrignola]

The users of the Italian Wikipedia have blocked all read and write access to http://it.wikipedia.org in protest of a possible law that is being discussed in the Italian Parliament.

News: http://www.businessinsider.com/italy-wikip...tapping-2011-10

Foundation-l thread: http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/wiki/foundation/252490

The page all users are redirected to (English version):

http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Com...ottobre_2011/en

[Michaeldsuarez]

You know the whole "blackout" was juvenile and petulant, right? How would more of that help anyone?

I've never thought much of "protest strikes" and the like. If you're serious, then you go on strike until your demands are met. Going on strike for 24 hours is just a stunt.

Yes, I know that it was a juvenile, attention-seeking stunt:

http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Com...obre_2011/Media

They do something that gains the attention of the media, the media spreads news of "Fascism returning to Italy," and readers of the media scream, "FREE SPEECH." They didn't need to go on for longer than 24 hours because they gained the media's attention in less than 24 hours. They've turned Wikipedia into an effective tool for political activists.

I'm not going to comment on whether the stunt was wrong or not until I understand whether or not Wikipedia was actually endangered. I'm also wondering if Wikipedia had anything to do with changes being made to the bill. If so, then the stunt might have resulted in something positive.

Of course they bailed. If not what are they doing to protect the free speech rights of the newspapers and the other sites still on the line?

Because they believe or they're claiming to believe that the protest was an act of self-preservation rather than activism. Defending non-WMF properties wouldn't be in line with the self-preservation line of thinking.

Hey, we're all in awe that you can read Italian. You are awesome! Really, really, AWESOME!!!

Maybe you can offer some translations and/or synopses rather than lists of links that the vast majority here can't read. I mean, that would be even more awesome.

I'd rather have you use Google Translate so that you could make your own judgments than to have you depend on my judgments and interpretations alone.

This post has been edited by Michaeldsuarez:

[GlassBeadGame]

Of course they bailed. If not what are they doing to protect the free speech rights of the newspapers and the other sites still on the line?

Because they believe or they're claiming to believe that the protest was an act of self-preservation rather than activism. Defending non-WMF properties wouldn't be in line with the self-preservation line of thinking.

More internet libertarian selfishness. What gives them the right ask others to be concerned about how the law impacts them when they care nothing about the more serious impact the law might have on important democratic institutions? But run along, the world is again safe from imaginary threats to important article writing such as the Impact of Italian Culture in North America.

[Michaeldsuarez]

More internet libertarian selfishness. What gives them the right ask others to be concerned about how the law impacts them when they care nothing about the more serious impact the law might have on important democratic institutions? But run along, the world is again safe from imaginary threats to important article writing such as the Impact of Italian Culture in North America.

I believe that Wikipedia has the right to defend itself, but I don't believe that Wikipedia has the right to be used for activism. The Wikipedia community, on the hand, has the right to advocate changes in government, as long as they're not using Wikipedia or the Wikipedia name in order to do it (ie. activity outside of Wikipedia). Each individual Wikipedian has the right to express their views. They can create blogs and use Twitter in order to show their opposition to the public and help non-WMF publications.

Also, Wikipedia did help newspapers. Wikipedia turned local Italian concerns into international news. They drew international attention to the proposed law. Wikipedia's "weapon" is the spreading of information, and they used it well. Wikipedia passed the torch to the media, who in turn, passed it to an international community of vocal free speech advocates. Silvio Berlusconi and his bill are now under international scrutiny.

This post has been edited by Michaeldsuarez: