Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales on internet censorship

[BWandzia]

Only censorship IS ON WIKIPEDIA AKA WIKIPEDOIA!WiKIPEDIA aka WIKIPEDOIA IS4WIKIPEDOS BOOKMARK WIKI-watch.de

[BWandzia]

Only censorship on wikipedoia is no freedom only nazijew administrators with jewbo make up bs rules fittin only these pigs!His real call is to rape kids thats wikipedoia norm!BETER EXPLAIN Y WIKIPEDOIA IS SO FUKD UP!CANt Believe how THESE STUPID MOTHERFUKIN ADMINISTRATORS WORK LIKE ROBOTZOMBIES COUNTLES HOURS FOR SLAVE DRIVER PEDOPORNKIKNG JEWBO!WOW!ABSOLUTE duhSTUPIDITY!PURE FACTS!

[MrOpenGamer]

14 people oppose free speech.

[GeirMovies]

HE IS DESTROYING MY SOUL WITH HIS EYES

[Trixter210916813]

My father served this country for 37 yrs to fight against Ignorance (Klobuchar etc..) So people can live and be free. Everyday I read about misprioritized politicans. They are allowing "terrorists" to win by censoring us so much that we no longer have a voice or a choice. Is that what our country has come down to... locking every free thinker/doer/creator behind bars. Is it really time for another civil war? Really? Will the "Men in Black" come after me for writing this? Hmm??

[darioshanghai]

If Wikipedia has money problems, Wales, stop allowing the substitution of genuine information on Seignorage and NWO with system's propaganda: this way people could learn something about how money is really made and Wikipedia could really be free.

[cyborgchimpy]

@darioshanghai money=slave credit.

[wisbetwilsion]

(Forgive my poor English)I'm a person in mainland China now browsing Youtube via VPN proxy . And frankly speaking, Wikipedia is awesome, it help me a lot, it's a place where you feel relax and homeble. It represents some beautiful parts of human nature that is the pleasure you gained though helping others( also you can gain that pleasure though hurt others). In short: Thank you, Jimmy.

[taterandmatt]

Censoring is what ruined the Bible back in King James' day. And now, censoring ruins most other things. The truth is out there, people. Guys have wangs. Girls have slits. People die violently. And your kids WILL HAVE SEX EVENTUALLY. Get over it and stop whining that not everybody else is as uptight as you. 8P

[AcidPresident]

@taterandmatt How can you seriously think moderation of any sort is not needed? Whilst I somewhat agree with the essence of what you are saying (censorship as a means of control and how it has been used throughout history is fucking disgusting indeed), but you don't understand human psychology if you think exposing a child to say a video of a brutal rape or torture would not have a negative effect on them.

[AcidPresident]

@taterandmatt And children aside, sadly society as a whole is not smart nor stable enough to have everything 'out there' in the open as you preach.

[WeAreAnonymousEU]

You have our attention.

We are Anonymous.

[papasmurfXXX]

Don;t listen to this guy, WIkipedia always censors the biography i write about myself because i'm not notable >:( ! 

[sbuniverse]

@papasmurfXXX lol

[ZakobYoa]

@papasmurfXXX loser

[rottencore0]

Listen to the guy reading from a script.

Asking for more money.

Promoting his website.

[Apathyist]

@rottencore0

Listen to the white, middle class male. Mouth is moving but nothing comes out.

[666lilnickY]

censorship is wrong, if you want to ignore what you don't like then get a damn webblocker. don't assume we all have your opinions.

[Zickcermacity]

We have something more dangerous than Chinese censorship:

FOX NEWS!

[KingCast65]

Wiki: Hey King go get a newspaper account.

KingCast: OK here's the Nashua Telegraph, Wiki says it's the second-largest paper in NH (27,000 daily, and 34,000 on Sunday)

Wiki: Hey King you misquoted the account.

KingCast: OK, here's direct quotes showing that I spoke to Kelly Ayotte and the Police had me escorted out after she refused to acknowledge my presence.

Wiki: Hey King that's not good enough either, you have no proof she knew about the litigation.

KingCast: You guys are scum

[KingCast65]

Watch this video at KingCast65 Channel

Jimmy Wales and Wikipedia = bought & sold hypocrites who cannot be trusted

[dcdude51]

I hate you Jimbo Wales...but I do like your beard

[ANGELO13111]

JESUS CHRIST, this mans eyes FORCE you to give him money.

[xaddiex]

Since when was access to information a FUNDAMENTAL human right? Freedom of expression may be a human right but then surely that also means we don't all have to watch you express yourselves. Obviously I am a fan of the internet but it should definitely remain a privilege. I know there are plenty of sources of information on the internet but making it a right is like giving people the right to be lazy and uneducated.

[AnimalNitrates]

@xaddiex Are you... are you fucking kidding me? You seriously don't think that people have the right to know things? That people should remain oppressed and without knowledge?

For a moment, I didn't think we were in the Middle Ages with that comment.

[Joedaniels007]

@AnimalNitrates now thats a nice reply...

[xaddiex]

@AnimalNitrates The right to know things and the right to the internet should be treated as mutually exclusive. You can't say access to information is a FUNDAMENTAL human right though. If you ask me how much I earn a year it is not your right to know. If you actually look at the arguments this video is making you will see what I mean. You clearly just wanted to jump down my throat because you love the internet that much.

[AnimalNitrates]

@xaddiex That's COMPLETELY different from wanting to know what your government is doing without our knowledge. I'm not BOTHERED about how much you earn; I AM bothered about what my government is doing.

[tafxkz]

@xaddiex

yeah you are absolutely right

access to information is NOT a human right, it should always remain a privileged that people should grovel for so they will be less than people to become privileged

Now now now, thank you for the privilege of letting us watch your expression in this comment, we are so honored.

[xaddiex]

@tafxkz I'm sorry, did you not understand why I capitalised FUNDAMENTAL? It should be a privilege. If you want to grovel for it that's your business but I didn't say what you are trying to make it look like I said.

[tafxkz]

@xaddiex

Ah thank you for your privileged perspective - to what do we owe your free sharing of this information ?

[cyborgchimpy]

@xaddiex people do have the right to be lazy and uneducated. they will just have to know the consequences, in the end, it will be on their acount.

[ChrisJakeSkype]

JIMMY WALES DEMANDS YOU GIVE HIM YOUR BLOOD AS DONATION TO WIKIPEDIA. TOGETHER WE CAN CREATE A BIG PILE OF BLOOD. NO ADS. NO VAMPIRES. NO AGENDA. NO ITEMS. FOX ONLY. FINAL DESTINATION.

[bishopdante]

HACKER ETHICS!!! ACCESS TO INFORMATION IS A HUMAN RIGHT!

[ALPHAandOMEGA44]

Wikipedia in lies about BIll Cooper.

[bigwhiteballs27]

An appeal from Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales again??

people already donated one i believe it was 10 millions and you said you've reached your goals.

and now again?!

[liOVERLOADil]

@bigwhiteballs27 Do you think running a webpage which gets millions of hits a day is free? Do you think PBS will ever stop asking for money?

[bigwhiteballs27]

@liOVERLOADil

youtube is free, Hulu is free and more...

the more people watch it the better for him.

[liOVERLOADil]

@bigwhiteballs27 Youtube and Hulu both have ads, Wikipedia does NOT. If Wikipedia had ads and a sponsor wanted an article removed for whatever reason, it would be in their best interest to remove it; this is CENSORSHIP. Do you want this on Wikipedia?

[bigwhiteballs27]

@liOVERLOADil

Good point, but Wikipedia is Encyclopedia, so who's censoring Encyclopedia? They only censor Youtube and Hulu because of copyrights, If Wikipedia would put movies they would have to remove them too, trust me.

[liOVERLOADil]

@bigwhiteballs27 No. You're missing the point. Copyright infringement and advertizing ethics are two very different things. Imagine I sell soap, and Wikipedia has ad-space and I buy ad-space on Wikipedia for my soap. Now imagine that I accounted for 75% of Wikipedia's ad profits. If there were an article on Wikipedia critical of my soap and I told Wikipedia that I wanted it removed or else I would stop buying ad space, what do you think Wikipedia would do? This is censorship.

[bigwhiteballs27]

@liOVERLOADil

Yeah, but there are two types of censorship, one comes from Dictatorship where there is no freedom of speech, and the second comes from Democracy where it's smart censorship, the kind you're talking about where rich people censoring what ever they want.

[Theriot6592]

@kristopheraugust not being denied information that is available to you IS a human right

[16neelloc]

@16neelloc Ban Wikipedia

thepetitionsitedotcom/1/ban-wi­kipedia/

[WindowsVistaMan14]

At my school Wikipedia is BLOCKED WTF

[goodtovent]

Yea, uneducated, non-scholars, with no training have a right to post crap on the internet and have a right to mis-paraphrase great works : P How dare people censor a persons right to publish stuff with no training what so ever. LOL

[kkkaldav]

WP is one of THE MOST censored environments ever. EVERY SINGLE WORD is subject to the interpretation/veto of various pressure groups/ agitators/ political (US-political) idealogues. Why the fuck would china (or anyone else for that matter) allow a blatant white male US middle class late 20th century ideologically determined world view to be presented as THE TRUTH. WP is good if you want to know what a violin is but for anthying in the least controversial it is pure propaganda. Jaheseus Christ!

[radajan]

Wikipedia is awesome. In the massive sewer that is the internet, it is one of the few bright spots. Now Youtube on the other hand has gone way down hill.

[Dorfkanal]

Please read this article. Wikipedia isn't neutral at all. In fact, Wikipedia applies censorship in extreme ways:

bit (dot) ly / 5CMOGi

[Dorfkanal]

Wales is such a hypocrite. Wikipedia themselves are happily endorsing censorship. A good example is that guy inside Wikipedia (who is member of pro-AGW organisation RealClimate) rewriting thousands of articles about climate change, CO2, etc. to evoke the impression there would be a scientific consensus abot man-made global warming. Google for:

'wikipedia's climate doctor'

[WolYou]

If you imagine a world whithout cencorship, you must also imagine a world in which the profit paradigm is gone.

Since human beings are animals, their greed to get more than they need will always surpass their demand for free information. Everyone here will back up from his demands of a world with free information as soon as he gets offered a million dollars. Thats the state in which mankind is trapped. And I fail to see any changes in this rather primitive acting for the next hundred years.

[7ONLYSeven]

Wikipedia sucks, it should be used as ones last resort in seeking information.

[timtak1]

Wikipedia censors all the stuff ("the rest of the library") that ends up on Wikia, that makes Mr. Wales money.

It could be argued therefore that Wikipedia censors content for self-gratuity.

[3DPlanets]

@timtak1

No, it doesn't censor itself. Wikipedia is an effort to build an encyclopedia. Would you expect huge articles about the Yuuzhan Vong or BG-light in an encyclopedia? No.

[timtak1]

@3DPlanets

This video starts with the assertion that "Freedom of information is a fundamental right" and wikipedia generally has high flown aspirations to making information free. What info? What is an encyclopedia?

By keeping the definition of an encylcopedia linked to that of traditional paper based encyclopedia, and rejecting articles about "Yuuzhan Vong" (whoever) or the trivia sections, wikipedia's content is censored, and the need for another bigger commercial encyclopedia is created.

[3DPlanets]

@timtak1

But they're trying to build an encyclopedia. Nobody knows about everything, and nobody can find sources to refer to when writing about. And even if that were possible, think of all the strain that would put on Wikipedia's servers! In fact, Wikipedia covers MORE than a paper encyclopedia. Seems to me the paper encyclopedias are the ones censoring themselves. Wikipedia doesn't need full articles on Ant #45831257891375986357395631957 or Carbon Atom 264321462999994857191594915.

[3DPlanets]

@3DPlanets

"writing about."

Oops. Should be "writing about everything." =-P

[timtak1]

@3DPlanets

Why are they trying to build an "encyclopedia", by their defintion? If they are into freee information and free learning then why not hold a wider definition of encyclopedia?

I agree with the "sources" (or is it "reputable sources") limitation that makes wikipedia more reliable than a blog.

I agree that more conent would place more load on the servers, but this (in the case of long tail articles) could be offset by google adsense.

And that is what wikia does.

[3DPlanets]

@timtak1

But still, Wikipedia is not about everything. If you bothered to read WP:NOT, you would realize this. They have criteria that the subject of an article must meet before it's worthy of an article. Encyclopedia =/= index of everything in the universe. You are probably not notable enough to have a Wikipedia article, nor are credible sources for such an article likely to exist. Just because there are certain criteria to meet for an article does not mean Wikipedia is censored.

[timtak1]

@3DPlanets

Why does WP:NOT define criteria as it does?

Why is it not, does it not become an index of everything in the universe?

I suggest retaining the credible source requirement, but why "notability" or why such a narrow definition of what is notable (e.g. the trivia lists which I used to find interesting)?

One reason is because it puts a strain on the servers. Why not use AdSense on such "long tail" articles, as "the rest of the library" wikia does?

Why is there a wikipedia Wikia split?

[3DPlanets]

@timtak1

Trivia lists can include false information, urban legends, vandalism, etc. That's why Wikipedia does not allow long trivia lists. As WP:NOT says, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate mass collection of random information. There's no article on Trash Can #431 or Piece of Paper #842. Why? Nobody cares. Does the world really need to know about it? If not, then it's not for Wikipedia. Nobody apart from those reading this debate cares about this comment. Therefore it has no Wikipedia article.

[timtak1]

@3DPlanets

Why does WP:NOT exist? Why not change WP:NOT?

Worried about keeping irrelevance? Why? Strain on the servers? Use AdSense. By whose definition? Do people read Wikia? Number of page hits? Enough ad revenue to provide for servers? That sounds fair.

I am recommending that the requirement for a reliable source be retained, so that truth and a certain degree of notability remain a requirement.

But that notability be democratically (hits/viability) rather than defined by WP:NOT.

[3DPlanets]

@timtak1

*facepalm* STFU.

[timtak1]

@3DPlanets

Shut the fuck up?

That is why I call WP:NOT censorship.

Most people, including yourself it would seem, have not worked out why certain expressions are disallowed. That is just the way it is. The credo. WP:NOT.

But others have something to gain.

[timtak1]

@timtak1

Judicious use of goolgle AdAnse (as on wikia) on articles that are viewed less rarely, could combine "the encyclopedia" with "the rest of the library" on one big freedom-of-information promoting wiki.

But as it is the "rest of the library" (the adsense related part) is a commercial concern assocciated with a minority.

Allowing adsense only on pages where, for example, there is more bandwith spent on writing than reading might be AdSensed.

[CHUCKYCHUCKYBOBUCY]

Thanks Jimmy,

Anyone who thinks that the internet should be censored should be publicly after watching their wife and children be raped and burned in front of them. Then their organs (those not burned) should be sold to wealthy Japanese medical patients. This is the behavior you're promoting if you believe in China's policy.

[gonsuy]

yeah dude, the only problem is that the chinesse guy doing the job is as poor as a rat and your filthy rich.

[47mrcool]

wikipedia is awsome now if you smell your daddys shit so long then you will hate it,now go and fry your pen** on the frypan and be happy with it

[sherrylynn70]

Thank you for your time bringing so much insight to the realities...I am very thankful for an opportunity to speak out in behalf of my brothers plight...and, coming here gives me encouragement...

[Evi1M4chine]

Wales, youre a soulless delusional criminal! GTFO OUR Internet! You are a special agent, fostering clear lies on Wikipedia, to support the views of the criminals in power. Id found a country, just to make you an enemy of my state, and shoot you on arrival!

[warpedcomedy]

Someone needs to see a shrink, crackboy.

[Percapita99]

I would like to ask Jimmy Wales what the hell he was smoking when he developed wikianswers.

[charronfamilyconnect]

Now you know the origin of the expression too far out in left field. Its a quality of todays so called great thinkers who lack balance in their life and centredness in their life. They are confined to a narrow band width of thought and imagination and are typically uncompassionate egotists.

[charronfamilyconnect]

I see far too much censorship on wikipedia. Like why is astrotheology no longer listed in wikipedia and people like Gregg Braden and a whole slew of new age thinkers such as him. Is someone afraid of new ideas that conflict with the present day status quo?? So much for access to information and freedom of speech. Wikipedia Sucks big ones just like its biased left brain thinking owners of that site.

[hairybeast101]

wikipedia censors and discriminates against thirdworld countries

[brianreading]

That's pretty contentious, and unverifiable. :P

[7jackson7michigan7]

I got blocked from Wiki because i posted a game by MILTON BRADLEY on the list of MB games. I WENT TO wIKI to find any information i could on the game called POP BALL the gay game of chance.----its a real game ,check out my video-they won,t unblock me, and so far i have found nothing on this game and since i first posted my vid a load of people on plastic balls popping them has popped up ---its a kids game.

[MagnoliaSamurai]

You can't add something to wikipedia that can't be confirmed with a reliable source. If you just kept trying to add it over and over, you were probably blocked for being disruptive.

[brianreading]

I can tell you that you weren't blocked from Wikipedia for that. You were blocked because you failed to listen to consensus, or were unmistakably attempting to vandalize it multiple times.

You don't get blocked by simply doing what you said you did. Plain and simple.

[ciaran3707]

If Wikipedia wasn't censored at all it would end up being full of bullshit and speculation like a gloriifed iternet forum.

[Raffaello9]

some people keep deleting my contributions to the sum of human knowledge. No reason to continue there.

[brianreading]

Put many of the most reliable sources that you know of, word it in a neutral manner, and follow other Wikipedia guidelines, and you probably wouldn't get your contributions deleted.

[charronfamilyconnect]

So in other words become a conformist, and don't become a free thinker, nor rock the boat, and you will get recognition on Wikipedia perhaps huh?

[westmeaty]

shut the fuck up faggot. wikiCUNTia is run by a bunch of feminazi CUNTS who censor info. there's no such thing as freedom of expression. fuck you butch dyke fugly fat cunts.

[BeatBuddy]

Checked your profile and saw that homosexualilty is your big obsession. Perhaps if you sucked a cock you could get it out of your system. And if you're hostile to women, it's because none of them will give you a second look.

[westmeaty]

checked your profile and saw that you're a stupid cunt yapping. perhaps if you sucked more cock and were gargling more cum like a good cunt, you wouldn't be sounding like a fucking moron allt he time. you are hostile to intelligent people (aka MEN) because you're a dumb cunt. now shut the fuck up dumb cunt before i kick you in your dumb cunt. lol :) too bad you got rejected again dumb cunt hahahahah:)

[BeatBuddy]

It's unfortunate that you're too stupid to appreciate my fecund and eclectic mind. That's okay, though, because it's people like you that cause my to think more highly of myself than I would have otherwise. You didn't read my profile carefully, sweetheart, because I'm a male, and handsome enough to sweep you off your homophobic feet.

[westmeaty]

so basically you're a sissy ass faggot sucking cock. keep milking my cock u fucking faggot lolol :)

[BeatBuddy]

Lie on your stomach, spread your legs, and I'll show you what power this sissy ass faggot has. You'll beg for more.

[linkvashflcl]

I like Wikipedia and freedom of information, and in these times when there is so much inequality in gaps of knowledge between developed and undeveloped nations informational freedom looks really good. But we need to be more careful about "everyone around the world having free access to the SUM of human knowledge". That means the spread of sadistic, malicious, and hurtful knowledge along with the scientific, virtuous, and knowledge for its own sake kind of knowledge. Depends on what spreads more.

[Meanie83]

What about the US and EU plans to censor the internet?

[GermaineIlya]

Yet again they are speaking out about other countries before they sorted their own mess out. Speaking out about internet censorship on You Tube: LOL! YouTube is censored; they censored their political page where they had 2 candidates running for presidency instead of 5 (which was the real number); they suspend accounts that differ from their political views and have a large impact (million or so views) and i witnessed it first hand.

[biantai888]

Is he crazy? The Internet is a terrible idea!

[A7XDudeDrums]

elaborate more, why is that?

[Amavand]

Wikipedia it self is censored. Many times I have personally tried to change the page on His Imperial Majesty Shahanshah Aryamehr (Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi) proving that he was a good man and debunking all the lies about his "terrifying secret police", yet, no matter how much evidence and proof I put up and try to change it, they keep deleting it.

Wikipedia is full of censorship.

Only the ones who want to write their side of the story does it.

Down with Wikipedia!

[dumbface2]

yes wikipedia is very censored, go into the discussion area and you can see some of it

[ZNB91]

is that wikipedia or other people on wikipedia?

[omid11]

you're the biggest moron ever!

[Coastergeekperson04]

No, Larry stole Jimbo's idea with the more strict and *cough* crappy wiki, the Citizendium.

[rhys1one]

I'm originally from from Ireland, but have spent time in mainland China.

It's quite difficult to edit and upload information on the Wikipedia website.

The Chinese employ "officially" that is, about 50,000 (over 9000) internets police.

You can gain access by proxy to Wikipedia but the website does not allow users using proxies to edit pages.

Most of my work colleagues in the mainland, were stultifyingly uninformed on their countries recent and not so recent political and diplomatic activities.

[Jtaylor1]

if Wikipedia supports free speech, then why are they censoring it?

[IceCreamMassacre]

They are not exactly censoring themselves.

It is the Government in Iran and China that are not for free speech.

When viewing the video, also LISTEN.

[Coastergeekperson04]

People who censor it don't know one of the biggest rules:

WIKIPEDIA IS NOT CENSORED!

[goodtovent]

@IceCreamMassacre I view Wikipedia as being unreliable anyway, too much room for mistakes by non scholars and people not paraphrasing great works correctly. Even if you get people constantly correcting mistakes on wikipedia there is a falacy that a majority of people is correct. You can get thousands of people getting data wrong and not siting sources properly. I like the idea of free information on the internet but I simply don't trust wikipedia.

[IceCreamMassacre]

@goodtovent Of course Wikipedia is unreliable, I never said it wasn't. There is a difference between being unreliable and being censored. It is an unwritten rule that you should always find at least three sources to the material before using information you did not collect yourself. If Wikipedia is to be one of them, you can use the other sources to check its validity.

[DuBarryFilms]

@IceCreamMassacre Soon the UK is censoring based on a meeting they had with "Copywrite Lobbyists" in the past couple days.~

[Versades]

censoring content for self gratuity is not the same thing as censoring people. Free speech does not guarantee one's opportunity to exploit or abuse another. Understanding the difference accompanies a lack of concern for vulgarism and graphical content.

When you are free you are not at liberty.

[yitzchak13]

That was a nice speech.

[bobtuskinsherbane]

yeayea, very moving, but what about the politicians censoring the info about them fool punk ass mother fsssa

[marmary5555]

well said

[ragnarock86]

I agree with what he says. It's all good and everyting, but mybe he should practice what he preaches. The fact of the matter is, Wikipedia itself censors people all the time....

[smartwikada]

That's so true!!! Very sad :( but very true.

[thecaster]

Practice what he preaches? Jimbo is not Wikipedia, Wikipedia is people.

[ragnarock86]

So? What exactly is your point? I know wikipedia is information posted by other users, but "JIMBO" over here runs wikipedia, and therefore has control of what goes up and what doesn't.

You don't the block or "censor" truths that people put up on wikipedia? Then do ur research and u'll be surprised...

[joshdesk]

Uh...no.

There's a difference. China censors truth, Wikipedia censors lies simply because its goal is to promote truth.

[ragnarock86]

Uhmmmm... How about... NO!

Do ur research. They censor truth also. There's a video about it on youtube. And it shows it right as it happens. And the explains what it's all about.

[liOVERLOADil]

@joshdesk A censorship of lies? Interesting.

[banana04131]

w00t!