To those who think Wikipedia is neutral and think those who see a clear slant toward the so called "progressive" end of the scale in content and community are all imagining it, can you explain to me how it can possibly be that without apparently anyone even noticing much less objecting vehemently, the right of a Wikipedia editor to choose their username from any language in the world, has somehow been elevated to a matter of tolerance and inclusion equivalent to race, sexuality, etc?
Look at this shit.....
Holy fucking cow. That is some Grade A wokester bullshit right there.A username is one of the few personal identifiers on Wikipedia and broad discretion was and is granted on the understanding that editors from all over the world, from many different language backgrounds, are welcome to edit Wikipedia. "Be open, welcoming, and inclusive" was part of the WP:FIVEPILLARS on which Wikipedia was founded. That is the reason why we shouldn't view usernames from other alphabets as something that we "tolerate" or that stands in the way of a "common editing environment". Just as we don't say accessibility features and other protected human rights areas on Wikipedia are inconvenient to implement or honour. I think you are understanding of this viewpoint and hope you reconsider the framing of why this provoked such a reaction in the community. The username and the language background from where it came had nothing to do with the locus of the dispute. It was brought up for an ignorant reason. Just as it would have been as inappropriate to single out their gender identity, sexuality, cultural background, ethnicity, disability, etc. Inconvenient. Too sensitive. Absurd. You're imagining things. Not normal. Unintentional. All of these things have been used to attack and dismiss each one of these protected grounds throughout history. They're all very effective in prevent protected grounds from being recognized and enforced. Mkdw talk 01:51, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
Is it a stretch to say Wikipedia just disappeared right up its own asshole in a shameless attempt to appeal to the minorities who already make up a massively disproportionate ratio of the community?
Wikipedia has long been the natural home to those minorities who don't feel normal, to the point that the whole TERF issue will probably still yet cause massive reputational harm, as the supposedly diverse and inclusive Wikipedia tries to cope with the fact it STILL has a thoroughly miserable record in being attractive to the rather large proportion of the world who identify as straight, born a woman, living as a women, where race/ethnicity/nationality/religion is entirely irrelevant.
Rather than focus on that massive problem, the ever woke Wikipedia community wants to add USERNAMES to the long list of protected characteristics? You will note they said "we" a whole bunch there, and specifically referred to the "reaction in the community".
I will say that I definitely think a lot of the wokester outrage over this issue is completely fake, all part of the Wikipediocracy plot to take down a long time enemy, Scottywong, but I don't think there can be any doubt that these are Mkdw's genuine beliefs right here, and they are shared by a whole bunch of other Wikipedia editors.
And since they are a Wikipedia Administrator, you better believe they have the power to enforce them.
Not only is this yet more proof that Wikipedia is far more about being a haven for radicals and driving not reflecting world politics, it is also pretty good proof that Wikipedia would suck at being a global encyclopedia if it ever actually decided that was its primary mission.
Yes, it is of course rather obvious that if Wikipedia wants to be a global effort it is a good thing that editors from different parts of the world who speak different languages can, if they have the ability, contribute on different language editions.
The key word there is ability.
If you are one of these people who comes from a foreign culture but is quite capable of reading and writing in English, then it isn't remotely controversial, let alone -ist, to state that you should be aware that the vast majority of your peers on the English language Wikipedia can only read English and only parse the Latin alphabet.
Yes, of course it is terribly colonial of me to refer to non-English speakers and things as foreign, but you can frankly go fuck yourself you snowflake. One of the benefits of being so good at conquering the globe, is that we get to have English as the global language. Being a communist regime isn't the only reason Mandarin Wikipedia is dwarfed by English Wikipedia.
We are Rome, and everywhere we stand, is Rome.
That said, we are all grown ups, we can put aside matters of who won what wars and whose culture is the best to come together to build a shared global knowledge. Or at least, as history has shown quite well, ironically through the hugely multicultural society the is Britain today, we don't need to let wokester bullshit stand in its way. Indeed, dare I say it is the wokesters who are erecting barriers and preventing cross cultural understanding. If it's racist to say Islamic culture is sexist, don't be surprised to see you don't have an awful lot of English speaking Islamic women wanting to create excellent articles for English Wikipedia.
Furthermore, if you are a member of the Wikipedia movement, you will appreciate how crucial it is to the basic function of communication and collaboration, that editors are able to recognise and indeed use editor's usernames. Yes, you can copy and paste foreign character names, but if the names are barely even recognisable to you, that is very risky.
I want to stress here that I am deliberately talking about the functional part of a Wikipedia editor's identity, their username, not their signature. Because unsurprisingly, a classic Wikipedia fudge around this issue is to advise users with foreign names to use a Latin character signature. Quite odd that they don't see that as a hugely offensive act of forced assimilation. You can be brown, but only on the inside! Kindly use your slave name around these parts, boy.
It says a lot about Wikipedia that none of the billions of dollars of donor money being spent on "inclusion" ever got directed toward this issue. It was spent only on allowing editors to move seamlessly between language editions using one single username, which is of course what has meant this issue has become more of an issue, as more and more foreign looking usernames started to appear in English language Wikipedia.
The hilarious thing is, there is an inclusive way to solve this issue that also meets the needs of an ENCYCLOPEDIA. Allow users to choose their primary username in the alphabet of their home wiki, and on their first instance in visiting a foreign edition where their user name will baffle and confuse, they are required to enter a pseudonym in the local language.
This becomes their local username, not their signature, with technology handling the rest, up to and including allowing local signatures to reflect their chosen name if they are so fragile the cannot bear to be in a foreign land without their native identify on display (and tbf this probably applies more to an asshole like Beeblebrox venturing into foreign lands than it does in the opposite direction, as fanciful as it is that an ignorant bastard like Beeblebrox even knows a foreign language, since as one of the English Wikipedia Supreme Court he is in real life unsurprisingly a white man occupying a foreign land colonised by his forefathers, and in whose honour he treats its native inhabitants with open contempt).
If they cannot do so, it shall be seen as a sign they do indeed lack the WP:COMPETENCE required to edit that edition. Sorry not sorry.
This is no doubt too simple for Western Wikipedia. They love their grandstanding and virtue signalling and leftist cancel culture far too much.
Oh well.
Just another thing that will devalue the brand among the young (who sure as shit understand the practical complexities of global communication better than any dumbass wokester Wikipedian) and thus hopefully hasten their death.