News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on A Wikipedia editor's long-running campaign. Parent comment

Re:A Wikipedia editor's long-running campaign by jakobegger on Sunday May 20, 2018 @02:54AM (#17111587)
That’s a very generous interpretation. Usually, when you find something that is not sufficiently well sourced, you add “citation needed” or mention it on the talk page or something. You don’t just delete entire sections that aren’t obvious vandalism.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A Wikipedia editor's long-running campaign by notahacker on Sunday May 20, 2018 @04:39AM (#17111848)
You generally do on Biographies of Living Persons, particularly when it's controversial political figures and particularly when the material has a source which just happens to be RT
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A Wikipedia editor's long-running campaign by philwelch on Sunday May 20, 2018 @10:12PM (#17115767)
In my opinion, it's only fair to respond to hit pieces with generous interpretations. The internet outrage machine needs more coolant, not less.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A Wikipedia editor's long-running campaign by jakobegger on Tuesday May 22, 2018 @02:15AM (#17124046)
That is a good point.
[ Parent | on HN ]