Re: [Wikimedia ZA] Allegations of censorship

People in a teacup trying to brew a storm. The weasel is strong in them. I can see why they are deprecated as a source. Meh. Cheers, Peter -----Original Message----- From: WikimediaZA [mailto:wikimediaza-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of David Richfield Sent: 13 June 2020 17:09 To: Wikimedia South Africa Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia ZA] Allegations of censorship Oof, that's a very opinionated website complaining vigorously that they're neutral and accurate. Check out their coverage on Wales and Maher: https://thegrayzone.com/2020/06/11/meet-wikipedias-ayn-rand-loving-founder-… They for example say: Really? How is it relevant that the company that she worked for paid money-laundering fines, unless she was involved? I can see why they're not considered a reliable source. Also, he keeps saying that they haven't been forced to retract anything. That just means they don't do retractions, not that everything they print is correct. Thanks for sharing this! On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 at 15:40, Michael Graaf <graaf.michael(a)gmail.com> wrote: -- David Richfield +49 170 570 4998 _______________________________________________ WikimediaZA mailing list WikimediaZA(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaza To unsubscribe, send an email to WikimediaZA-unsubscribe(a)lists.wikimedia.org