Embed Notice

HTML Code

<blockquote style="position: relative; padding-left: 55px;"><section><a href="https://djsumdog.com/objects/fbaaea55-d353-4822-844b-6e01dabf3c0a">djsumdog (djsumdog@djsumdog.com)'s status on Friday, 12-Jul-2024 02:40:50 JST</a><a href="https://djsumdog.com/users/djsumdog" title="djsumdog@djsumdog.com"><img src="https://gnusocial.jp/avatar/2108-48-20220727014656.webp" width="48" height="48" alt="djsumdog" style="position: absolute; left: 0; top: 0;">djsumdog</a><div><a href="https://bae.st/objects/75ac4189-b920-408c-b35b-04e95d5b163f" rel="in-reply-to">in reply to</a><ul><li><li><a href="https://gnusocial.jp/user/254920" title="j@bae.st">Jake (formerly sjw) :lain_sneed:</a></li></ul></div></section><article><p>Kinda have my doubts on Ms Random BlickBlocker. I don't know much about Project 2025, only briefly hearing it mentioned on some alt-media podcasts. Most host assume it's a counter to "The 1619 Project" or the "1776 Commission."</p><p>The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Project_2025">Wikipedia talk page</a> on it is scathing.</p><p>The only think worth reading on Wikipedia these days are the talk pages. That's where you find the censored information.</p></article><footer><a rel="bookmark" href="https://gnusocial.jp/conversation/3361471#notice-6616384">In conversation</a><time datetime="2024-07-12T02:40:50+09:00" title="Friday, 12-Jul-2024 02:40:50 JST">about 5 months ago</time> <span>from <span><a href="https://djsumdog.com/objects/fbaaea55-d353-4822-844b-6e01dabf3c0a" rel="external" title="Sent from djsumdog.com via ActivityPub">djsumdog.com</a></span></span><a href="https://djsumdog.com/objects/fbaaea55-d353-4822-844b-6e01dabf3c0a">permalink</a><h4>Attachments</h4><ol><li><label><a rel="external" href="https://gnusocial.jp/attachment/2894498">Agreed. While there are dozens of opinions from pundits inserted into the article, yhe article itself has very little neutral information about the project. It didn't even include the four main aims of the project until yesterday. Bringjustthefactsplease (talk) 16:24, 4 July 2024 (UTC)    These "pundits" are all Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Like it or not, we're just an echo chamber of reliable sources as many issues have arisen from not just following reliable sources in the past. Aaron Liu (talk) 20:07, 4 July 2024 (UTC)    So the article doesn't attempt to give any neutral description or summary of the document in the introduction. At all. I have added a neutral and sourced introduction to the goals of the document and it has been removed twice with no reason given. Bringjustthefactsplease (talk) 21:38, 4 July 2024 (UTC)    Side note: Please assume good faith rather than giving other editors here talk page warnings for "POV Vandalism". Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 21:42, 4 July 2024 (UTC)    Here at Wikipedia, an echo chamber of reliable source, the highest standard of neutrality we can strive for is to cover every single thing proportional to how much they are covered in reliable sources. Everything else is too subjective. Aaron Liu (talk) 21:42, 4 July 2024 (UTC)    Each thing in this article is not covered.
    For example A neutral description of the project from BBC has been removed three times with no stated rationale. The centrist statement is cited, from a reputable source, but is not permitted to be included.
    See revision 1232604299 in which the stated rationale for removing a centrist perspective is "not everything that is sourced belongs in the lede" Bringjustthefactsplease (talk) 21:49, 4 July 2024 (UTC)</a></label><br><a href="https://djsumdog.com/media/671282f3303e8c27323a62e9dc386bafc75c19454e83e72a2171678b24f20747.png" rel="external">https://djsumdog.com/media/671282f3303e8c27323a62e9dc386bafc75c19454e83e72a2171678b24f20747.png</a></li></ol></footer></blockquote>

Corresponding Notice

Embed this notice
djsumdog (djsumdog@djsumdog.com)'s status on Friday, 12-Jul-2024 02:40:50 JSTdjsumdog
in reply to
- Terry
- Jake (formerly sjw) :lain_sneed:
Kinda have my doubts on Ms Random BlickBlocker. I don't know much about Project 2025, only briefly hearing it mentioned on some alt-media podcasts. Most host assume it's a counter to "The 1619 Project" or the "1776 Commission."
The Wikipedia talk page on it is scathing.
The only think worth reading on Wikipedia these days are the talk pages. That's where you find the censored information.
In conversationabout 5 months ago from djsumdog.compermalink
Attachments
1. Agreed. While there are dozens of opinions from pundits inserted into the article, yhe article itself has very little neutral information about the project. It didn't even include the four main aims of the project until yesterday. Bringjustthefactsplease (talk) 16:24, 4 July 2024 (UTC) These "pundits" are all Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Like it or not, we're just an echo chamber of reliable sources as many issues have arisen from not just following reliable sources in the past. Aaron Liu (talk) 20:07, 4 July 2024 (UTC) So the article doesn't attempt to give any neutral description or summary of the document in the introduction. At all. I have added a neutral and sourced introduction to the goals of the document and it has been removed twice with no reason given. Bringjustthefactsplease (talk) 21:38, 4 July 2024 (UTC) Side note: Please assume good faith rather than giving other editors here talk page warnings for "POV Vandalism". Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 21:42, 4 July 2024 (UTC) Here at Wikipedia, an echo chamber of reliable source, the highest standard of neutrality we can strive for is to cover every single thing proportional to how much they are covered in reliable sources. Everything else is too subjective. Aaron Liu (talk) 21:42, 4 July 2024 (UTC) Each thing in this article is not covered. For example A neutral description of the project from BBC has been removed three times with no stated rationale. The centrist statement is cited, from a reputable source, but is not permitted to be included. See revision 1232604299 in which the stated rationale for removing a centrist perspective is "not everything that is sourced belongs in the lede" Bringjustthefactsplease (talk) 21:49, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
  https://djsumdog.com/media/671282f3303e8c27323a62e9dc386bafc75c19454e83e72a2171678b24f20747.png

Public

Embed Notice

HTML Code

Corresponding Notice