This plan shows a fundamental misunderstanding within the WMF of what made Wikipedia as popular as it is.
What blithering idiot wrote that manifesto? Guy (Help!) 07:26, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
Hilarious to think Chapman finds common cause with Jimmy in the crusade against the so called lunatic charlatans. That's just a fancy name for people who talk shite and hope to convince mug punters it's the truth, right? Well, how is that not what Chapman did here? Not for monetary gain, but something far more powerful. Ideological one upmanship.I'm sorry but you are speaking utter nonsense. Perhaps you were taken in by the false claim that this is somehow an official statement by the WMF! It is not. It is a recommendation by a community working group with very little staff involvement. The idea that we are going to discard the classic notion of an encyclopedia and universal knowledge is ludicrous. Never going to happen. The WMF is not supporting such an idea. We are a diverse and open community, and a group of people (largely community members) got together and talked among themselves and came up with some ideas that simply aren't going to fly. Blaming the WMF for this is backwards - they have merely facilitated a strategy process which has come up with many recommendations, most of which aren't ever going to happen (for better or worse - better in this case).--Jimbo Wales (talk) 10:18, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
OK, so I cheated a bit, and Jimmy seems to be actually replying to this wingnut.....
....who seems to have escaped from the Wikipediocracy asylum.Yes, Jimbo should look at it. But, imho, this is not something that Jimbo is equipped to deal with. The WMF, even though they may not realize it, have become an existential threat to the usefulness of this encyclopedia to anyone who reads it. The current WMF must now be recognised as a mortal enemy which has declared systematic war "to the death" against this encyclopedia. Others must go to the link above and discuss next steps from an "at war" perspective. This is a Category 5 that most everyone thinks is just another whirling dervish. Nocturnalnow (talk) 04:08, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
But, it is not unreasonable to assume, given their similarity, and the fact Jimmy's comment is nominally still under Chapman's, if not directly so, that he intends this to be a reply to Chapman as well.
An interesting difference of opinion, to say the least, seeing as how Chapman loves to seize on any utterance of the word of Jimmy if it helps him shape Wikipedia to his liking, as seen so cringingly with that whole lunatic charlatan business.
My guess is we won't be seeing Wikipedia:Don't be backwards any time soon. Redirects: WP:CHECKYOURSELF and WP:DON'TWRECKYOURSELF
At the very least, it must be highly embarrassing to be caught with your trousers down in front of the headmaster. Unless, of course, you were feeling unloved and went specifically looking for a spanking. Each to their own, I'm not judging.