What I am doing to save this site.

[grandmaster-huon]

Why isn't the foundation doing anything about this? They are mainly PR now.

I spent the last 15+ years telling people, IN PUBLIC, that the WMF is rotten and the WP insiders are even more rotten. You are delusional if you think anything will "change" suddenly. Or ever. I still expect the WMF will crash and burn before there is serious "reform".

How did it become so bad?

[Ognistysztorm]

But quality over quantity, all the time.

Deletionism often leads to systemic biases, which ironically means a decline of quality.

[Archer]

Wikipedia appears to function as intended i.e. as a tool for manipulating public opinion. I think any serious critique of Wikipedia should make this point very clear and disabuse the reader of the notion that Wikipedia merely suffers from some sort of inevitable, garden-variety corruption or cronyism. Nobody can really call you a "conspiracy nut" - despite the constant media exposure and universally-negative depiction this trope receives, most people know a serious argument when they see it and won't give you any lip. Only the propagandist is shameless enough to make an ass of themselves using ad hominems, which are easily dispensed with by pointing out the fallacy. So much bogus critique (e.g. the drivel on wikipediocracy and most academic papers) replaces one illusion with another (usually more cynical and fatalistic) illusion. This serves no purpose except helping the Charlatans triage the people who see through their lies and habituating people to their criminal behavior. The credulous masses are not nearly so wretched as the poor, gutless bastards who yield to this second deception. The people who run Wikipedia (or any other propaganda apparatus) have no intention to address the obvious problems (often having equally obvious solutions) outsiders see, nor will they allow the general public to do so. At the very least, doesn't it seem a bit silly to write a critique for the sake of Wikipedia itself? Surely most of what we can observe is not news to the Wikipedia administration. WP:AGF is mind-poison because they intended it as mind-poison, not because everyone in Wikipedia's administration are too stupid to write effective policy.

[grandmaster-huon]

But quality over quantity, all the time.

Deletionism often leads to systemic biases, which ironically means a decline of quality.

But the vast majority of articles are stubs that are left to rot.

[grandmaster-huon]

Good luck getting any attention from the deranged MMO players. They will fight you tooth and nail.

Oh look, you got a comment. Someone accusing you of being an AI.

If for anything else, I'd like to hear your further answers to topics of AI neutrality and implementation. One last question, was this proposal written by a large linguistic model?

You're right.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meta:Re ... _Wikimedia

[Strelnikov]

In case it all vanishes, I copypasted both the proposal and the AfD to my other blog. We cannot let Wikipedia bury things over and over, like they tried with the Patrick Bet-David BLP (which is still standing....for now.)

[ericbarbour]

We cannot let Wikipedia bury things over and over, like they tried with the Patrick Bet-David BLP (which is still standing....for now.)

Agreed. That was the THIRD AFD for Bet-David's article. Obviously the insiders dislike him and want to "vanish" him, and obviously (made inescapable when the Bushranger crawls out of his hole to vote DELETE, he is still one of the pettiest assholes they ever had around) it is for political reasons. They despise video bloggers like this, who give plenty of time to right-wingers and conspiracy freaks.

Remember, they tried to do the same to Joe Rogan......REPEATEDLY. This is not "writing an encyclopedia", this is "trying to disappear somebody we don't like". And it is practically a daily occurrence. But you have to dig around to find cases.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... Experience
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... Experience
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Rogan ... Everything
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... s_in_Space
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiny_Happy_Jihad

Need more examples of petty wiki abuse? Look thru the AFD log since 2005. You will find plenty of tiny little wars, conducted by tiny little nobodies, buried in a haystack of angry typing.

Huon, you should know by now that various outsider people have proposed Wikimedia "reforms" before you. Not a single one of them led to anything. THEY ARE A CULT, and cults always operate in a top-down manner. Insiders "invent" something (Wikidata, Flow and Visual Editor being obvious examples) and they try to cram it down everyone's throats. Sometimes successfully and sometimes not. Visual Editor was a giant disaster, and we know exactly who pushed it: James Forrester. One of the WMF's longest surviving employees. Also one of the most evil little bastards I've ever seen in wiki-land. The finest of Jimmy Wales's retinue of deep-embedment ass-kissers. HE SHOULD BE FIRED. But he remains.