Jump to content

User talk:Jimbo Wales

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from User talk:JimboWales)

    Heritage Foundation plans to doxx and target Wikipedia editors

    Hi Jimbo, have you seen this? Carlstak (talk) 02:06, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    He has. 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 02:08, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, 2601AC47. Carlstak (talk) 00:04, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Update: "Mike Howell, of Heritage, told me that this “investigation” of Wikipedia, which, he said, “is where information is laundered,” will be “shared with the appropriate policymakers to help inform a strategic response.”" Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:14, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    What kind of strategic response we're looking at? And how soon? 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 23:55, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Holy shit, just what I thought. Thanks, Gråbergs Gråa Sång Carlstak (talk) 00:04, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Move the servers to a stable country like Australia. Create more redundancy in WMF's infrastructure. Carlstak (talk) 00:08, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    About that possibility: Jimbo did say that they’ll will obviously do whatever is needed to keep Wikipedia safe, but I'm not that concerned about the US. The First Amendment is still very strong and Section 230 is still intact. But in 2 hours… 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 00:42, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Right. I don't think many people realize how far the Constitutional rights of American citizens have already been eroded. The corrupt Supreme Court has expanded presidential powers beyond anything conceived in the Constitution and it's an open question at this point how far it might go in allowing Trump to become more like a king ruling by executive fiat than a president. He gives Musk a free hand at destruction, and they're busy looting the national patrimony—selling off more than 400 Federal properties around the country, including FBI Headquarters in Washington, DC, and the buildings which are the headquarters of the DOJ, HHS, DOL and more. Carlstak (talk) 01:11, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Going ahead with what he just said (and probably wrong about): Among my very highest priorities is to rescue our economy and get dramatic and immediate relief to working families. Also, without much proof, we’ve ended weaponized government where, as an example, a sitting president is allowed to viciously prosecute his political opponent like me. How did that work out? 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 02:50, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Good lord man, Trump lies non-stop. The list of "millions" of dead Social Security recipients he cited is completely debunked and totally made-up BS. Coroners are required by law to fill out a form when someone dies and send it SSA. Also, forget Australia as an alternative location for WMF servers—just found out that Starlink supplies internet services to Australia. Carlstak (talk) 03:34, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    But that ain’t all: Elon Musk just fist pumped Trump’s mention of planting a US flag on Mars. The billionaire owner of SpaceX believes that humanity will ultimately move off this planet and onto Mars. Republicans, all giving a standing ovation, looked up to the gallery where Musk is standing as they clapped and cheered.
    Now would be a good time for Jimbo to address this. 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 04:08, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    To address which aspect of this in what way? Genuine question, I'm not sure what you want me to do... Jimbo Wales (talk) 12:12, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Don't make me repeat it again… 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 12:33, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, don't explain and I won't answer because I don't know what you're asking. If that's your preference, then fine, but it seems much better to simply ask me a clear question or make a clear suggestion. Jimbo Wales (talk) 12:40, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Jimbo is well within his rights to ignore or refuse User talk:2601AC47's demand for response. If I had attorneys, they would advise me neither to 1) feed trolls nor 2) disclose possible strategies. I trust the foundation has excellent attorneys. BusterD (talk) 13:48, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Well in this particular case I genuinely don't know what he's suggesting (or asking). The Foundation does have excellent attorneys but in regards to the Heritage Foundation threatening to do this, well, it isn't actually illegal and it's hard to know under what legal theory the WMF might have standing. I personally don't know. Jimbo Wales (talk) 20:23, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    (starting to get frustrated) 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 21:38, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    (sighs and thinks that it's no longer possible to let this pass) Jimmy… For months, many of us have held onto hope that the Foundation would provide meaningful support to our members facing increasing harassment from the forces that have been attacking us. Yet, here we are, and Elon might be closer to a attempt takeover (and admittedly I don't know for sure about that), and so far, with all the due respect to you I can ever have, it's been inadequately addressed to us. The deflections and, frankly, the potential for complicity, although not obvious to me yet, is profoundly disappointing. I still trust you as our de facto leader, but my frustration, and that of many others, is reaching a breaking point. I know you're better than this, Jimmy Donal Wales. You possess the capacity to address this situation decisively and justly. Simply put, please don't let this issue be the catalyst that irrevocably damages this site and the cherished, ever-important movement we’ve built together. Now, I implore you, to respectfully fix this. Before it’s too late. 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 23:38, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Sounds like the WMF will feed editors to the wolves if the fascists come knockin'. Carlstak (talk) 01:19, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I mean, probably not honestly. PackMecEng (talk) 01:41, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Let's hope so. I've been in that position before and the social media platform involved came through on my behalf. They refused to divulge my information and because I remained anonymous, I could not be summoned to federal court by the bad guys. Carlstak (talk) 02:00, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Regretfully, you could be. Even without any preamble to back that up. Ratnahastin is one such victim, it seems. Any of us maybe next to face them. 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 11:33, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Before I go (for a while), this is what he said 3 years ago, and I damningly suggest he put those words where his mouth is: I think we can hold both of these thoughts in mind: first, that neutral presentation of facts is always possible and always desirable and always our goal. Second, that even good people in emotional circumstances (bombs falling, Wikipedians personally in danger) will find it very difficult. We should expect (even if we wish it weren't so) that on some specific topics, the treatment in one language will vary to a disagree from the treatment in another language of a 'hot' topic.
    Bye, Jimmy. 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 12:19, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:2601AC47, please stop clerking Jimbo's talk page, since you've demonstrated you're doing so in your own interest. BusterD (talk) 14:02, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Didn't you say that the WMF has been failing at its job to protect its volunteers for my entire wiki-career. There's no balancing force at work? 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 14:10, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I did indeed. I'm quite satisfied Jimbo read and processed my comment (and I thank you for requoting it). My ego doesn't require a personal response as yours seems to do. I didn't nakedly game auto-archiving here to enforce my requirements, using giving 5 more days for him to respond in edit summary as you have done. The community may access Jimmy's attention without your provocations. BusterD (talk) 15:10, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    This isn't about egos... 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 15:33, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Also this one. Not sure if it's related. 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 16:42, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Guess I should tell you they're winning now, and we've been doing almost little about it.[1] The situation has reached a critical juncture. So Jimbo, last chance, because should you do not address this immediately, you will face consequences that will irrevocably alter your relationship with this movement. 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 19:18, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    What I see is somebody selecting and excerpting some things from something that somebody in the Heritage foundation wrote and saying what they think that they mean and that it is the decided plan of the heritage foundation. It would be more meaningful if somebody provided a link to the document that those were selected from and what it's place is in the Heritage foundation. One person's idea? A decided plan by the management of the Heritage foundation? Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 19:51, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @North8000 Here you go:[1] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:29, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. That shows that the basis of what we're talking about is looks to be an unfinishd Powerpoint with no indication of who the author is with no indication of what it's status (if any) is within the Heritage foundation. And from the somebody derived a "The Heritage Foundation plans to do this" statement.North8000 (talk) 01:54, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    According to The Jewish Daily Forward: "The Heritage Foundation sent the pitch deck outlining the Wikipedia initiative to Jewish foundations and other prospective supporters of Project Esther, its roadmap for fighting antisemitism and anti-Zionism."
    What this article in the Forward says is relevant: "The Heritage Foundation’s Project Esther, a conservative plan to counter antisemitism, sees the problem as one in which a handful of “masterminds,” including Jews like George Soros and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, are seeking to “dismantle Western democracies, values and culture,” according to internal Heritage documents obtained by the Forward." Carlstak (talk) 02:25, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Like Carlstak said, there are secondary sources like The Forward, The New Yorker, etc. Granted, atm it boils down to "this is what The Heritage Foundation says they'll do", but just because they say it, it doesn't follow it's bullshit in all parts. We can hope, of course. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:19, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    While I'd still very much appreciate very specific questions and very specific requests, I want to be very clear about this: I, and the WMF, very strongly condemn anyone attacking, outing, or harrassing our volunteers. We've proven this over the years in court, lobbying to government officials, public statements, etc. Anyone suggesting a "potential for complicity" better come hard with evidence and reasons, because that's just nonsense. Anyone saying that the WMF will "feed editors to the wolves if fascists come knocking" is just not being serious. There is no statement, no action, no history of anything like that. What there is, and always has been, is a very strong commitment to human rights and freedom of expression.

    Right now in the United States - but not just in the United States - we see the values that we cherish under attack left and right. We all have to stay strong and fight the fight, and for me that means: NPOV. We are not yet another trollfest platform. We care about fairness, about facts, about the fundamental human desire and right to learn and to know, to consider in a fair way all legitimate sides of an issue.

    I'll tell you what doesn't keep us strong and that's absurd and wild accusations against the one institution who stands here to protect our values, the institution that I set up and believe in: the Wikimedia Foundation. Instead of saying "oh no, they are probably going to feed us to the wolves" say "how can I help? Where can I volunteer. Depending on where you live, there's a local chapter who probably could use some help. Depending on what you're interested in, probably the most important thing you can do is keep working to make Wikipedia excellent.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 20:26, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Fair enough. And of course, we must care about all that. But still... Bye again. 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 20:32, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The pdf that Gråbergs Gråa Sång linked to was uploaded by The Jewish Daily Forward. The Forward article says:
    The Heritage Foundation sent the pitch deck outlining the Wikipedia initiative to Jewish foundations and other prospective supporters of Project Esther, its roadmap for fighting antisemitism and anti-Zionism. The slideshow says the group’s “targeting methodologies” would include creating fake Wikipedia user accounts to try to trick editors into identifying themselves by sharing personal information or clicking on malicious tracking links that can identify people who click on them. It is unclear whether this has begun.
    The best analysis of all this I've seen is Molly White's "Elon Musk and the right’s war on Wikipedia", linked by the Forward also. Carlstak (talk) 20:44, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    PS:@Jimbo Wales: Thanks for your reply. I believe in Wikipedia and its mission—if I didn't, I wouldn't have donated many thousands of hours of my time to it. The US government, our democracy, and the Constitution itself are under assault from the inside and I'm very worried about it. It seems at least plausible that Elon Musk will look for ways to screw with WP. Slate published an article last month by writer and lawyer Stephen Harrison that says:
    Faced with the risk of harassment or real-world retaliation, many volunteer editors—especially those covering politically sensitive topics—may simply stop contributing. Those who remain are likely to be the most ideologically driven voices, further eroding Wikipedia’s stated goal of neutrality. The free encyclopedia will become too toxic to sustain.
    I don't agree with that last bit, but I take such threats seriously, having literally had guns pointed at my head in real life, more than once, by irate interrogators and soldiers alike. Carlstak (talk) 22:16, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, Molly is always awesome. Jimbo Wales (talk) 00:31, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • One thing that I think would be good in the long term would be to have some sort of Wikipedia PAC or other such institution intended to maintain pressure on laws to protect access to Wikipedia, protect Wikipedia editors, advocate for free-speech laws needed to support these things, and so on. Our mission here is just to write a neutral encyclopedia, but maintaining the access to that encyclopedia and the ability to continue writing and maintaining it is also important for that main mission to continue. Wikipedia's name carries a lot of weight; a PAC that could weigh in on proposed laws to indicate that they are a potential threat to us, or who could highlight things that threaten us, could be disproportionately impactful even if it isn't massive financially. I know people at the foundation (including Jimbo) has raised such issues publicly before and do engage in some lobbying, but having a dedicated political arm could be more effective if efforts to control or censor Wikipedia are stepping up - especially in terms of keeping that arm at a distance from the parts of the org focused on maintaining the enyclopedia itself, in order to ensure the neutrality of our content. --Aquillion (talk) 12:30, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    References

    1. ^ Harwell, Drew (March 6, 2025). "Inside the White House's new media strategy to promote Trump as 'KING'". The Washington Post. The Washington Post. Retrieved March 6, 2025.

    "He added that he prefers to keep his anonymity because he sometimes writes on contentious topics. He cited a massive defamation lawsuit filed last year by the government of India against the Wikimedia Foundation, and a more recent report about the conservative U.S. Heritage Foundation's plans to "identify and target" volunteer editors on Wikipedia." - The Korea Times

    @Stephenbharrison wrote earlier this year "Many Wikipedians deliberately avoid pages like "Gaza War," "Zionism," and even the meta-entry on Wikipedia's own coverage of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict." - Slate

    Is it fair to say that the "pile" of stuff like this is historically high, at least on en-WP? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:14, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    I think we can expect the unstable and dangerous Musk to set his Dunning-Kruger kids loose on erecting the US's very own Great Firewall to "regulate the Internet domestically". It's probably happening already. They'll "block access to selected websites and slow down cross-border internet traffic", unless the Democratic senators in the Congress clip Musk's wings. Carlstak (talk) 16:27, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello, Jumbo Jimbo! (Yes, that is what I'm going to be calling you, from now on.)

    What do you think of this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Forums? Do you approve or oppose my idea? A editor from mars (talk) 05:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    As others have said, I think it's problematic from a copyright point of view (not necessarily super hard to deal with, but that's a consideration) and also raises some really hard problems about NPOV. It's not up to us, as Wikipedians, to decide to prevent people from linking to a source because they don't like the owner of that source. We decide based on a neutral evaluation of editorial relevance, etc. Jimbo Wales (talk) 20:25, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I believe they are referring to the #Forums? topic at VPPR, not the Twitter one. ObserveOwl (talk) 20:46, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I believe you are right. But that topic is gone now. :(. I also don't see it in the most recent two archives, so... I'm sorry about that!--Jimbo Wales (talk) 20:15, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Nope, it's there. Search for "I think people can talk on a discussion forum ..." on the above link. Graham87 (talk) 01:43, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks! I posted a few thoughts over there.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 19:03, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Mark is the PM of Canada now

    I will only ask once, and you will not try to deflect this - do you think he will save us from those that want us to give in to their own interests? 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 00:33, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    I'll give a direct answer, if you promise not to tell me I'm not Jimbo (I already know that!) US-Canadian relations will be as bad as they ever have been over the next 3+ years, but Trump would never bomb Ottawa, nor will Canadians ever invite him in to be their dictator. Why do you think most of them live only a couple of hundred miles north of the USA, but don't just move to the USA? Because they would prefer to be Canadians rather than Americans. Smallbones(smalltalk) 03:42, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    In my dream, it gets spicier and deadly: The US declares all-out no-holds-barred war against them, Ottawa is bombed out, millions in the crossfire and with little choice but to either fight or submit their surrender, and Canada is fallen and captured ceremonially with Trump calling it the "biggest thing we've ever done in the history of our country, not even my people didn't think we actually could". All in 1 week. Mark "the corny"… "Governor"… is put to trial over ordering power from his owning land to the US cut, found guilty without evidence or a legitimate chance of proving innocence, sentenced to lifetime imprisonment… And shot and killed by a Proud Boy.
    So, Smallbones, what will it take to realize we're all but lost? Until Jimbo can answer that, I'll dream that he's forced to volunteer and face the very armed forces from which Jimbo once called home. 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 09:59, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Is there a particular link between Mark Carney and Jimbo Wales that prompts this quite broad question? CMD (talk) 04:06, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    There is none, and I'm getting very close to asking 2601AC47 to go away from my talk page permanently for wasting people's time. I have no expertise and no opinion in this area, and see absolutely no reason to comment.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 09:36, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Fine… But remember what happened to those that tried to help you steer things in the best way possible, only to be rebuffed or ignored. This can happen, and it's your great responsibility and trust on the line. 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 10:47, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It's actually ironic, after looking through the history of your Talk. You speak of "wasting people's time", yet your own history is littered with instances that might be considered wrong. Perhaps you recall the unfortunate fate of a certain admin, blocked under circumstances that some might deem... Questionable? I've seen everything the last dozen years, Jimmy. Every statement, every action, every dismissal. It's all quite illuminating. And just to play that up, I'm sure that admin that was blocked would have loved to have been able to just declare "no opinion" when called to task, or tricked to it. 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 13:56, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Reading this talk page now, if I were still an admin, I would probably block you. Please don't use me as an excuse for your childish antics. "I will only ask once, and you will not try to deflect this " is just not an acceptable way to address anyone, and it's just one example of everything you are doing wrong here. Fram (talk) 14:00, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Would it help making it up to tell you that I just nominated Jlwoodwa for Adminship? 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 18:46, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Not really, I have nominated it for deletion. I have no idea what you are trying to achieve by all this, but I guess it would be best if you just stopped it before you piss off even more people. Fram (talk) 19:37, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't get why you're still prosecuting this, when the ex-admin in question made clear he wants nothing to do with it. MiasmaEternal☎ 21:04, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Did you see Larry on Fox?

    Larry on Fox A 3 minute video, the first half is not too important. But the 2nd half raises some interesting questions and suggests a very important conversation. I'd love to see that conversation happen. I'm not sure Wikipedia has the institutional framework, or even the technical bandwidth to host that conversation. Can you suggest anything that would get that conversation going? Smallbones(smalltalk) 03:53, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Forget him. 2601AC47 (talk·contribs·my rights) Isn't a IP anon 10:07, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Let me guess, he's banging on about Wikipedia being left-wing, woke, or whatever epithet these people use now. He has been irrelevant for years. Black Kite (talk) 11:08, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    There's no need to guess - just watch the video. But a quick summary. He wants to know if the US and other governments employee people to edit Wikipedia. He wants to have a conversation about whether the US and others governments do, should they (I think he's agin it), and what to do about it. Smallbones(smalltalk) 11:50, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't know if it counts, but I read that Elon Musk donated 3 million dollars to WP. That was before he was in the government, though. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:37, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Sanger really doesn't like it when Wikipedia articles don't agree with his version of reality, but I must admit it's a new idea that the Deep State is influencing the content of our articles. Black Kite (talk) 12:44, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Jimbo, you and Larry Sanger could use a sweat lodge together or something, please heal any personal animosity if it exists. You and he are destined to be on a statue together somewhere, or a well-designed postage stamp, so put in a half-hour shouting at each other privately and let's get you both on stage at the same time at the 25th anniversary-year Paris conference (if not before). Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:20, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Good idea, but IMHO it should be a broader conversation - at least 4 people. Heck, invite Elon if he can get a visa. And overall, I think Larry was hoping for a much bigger, very public conversation. Is there a website that could host a big in-person meeting with "audience participation" gizmos and maybe 1,000 virtual invitees? That could be a broad, but orderly meeting that could come up with some actual recommendations. Maybe TED could pull off something like that, or maybe that Irish tech organization that Katherine Maher chaired for awhile. It really couldn't just be on Wikipedia, we'd need broader participation. Smallbones(smalltalk) 14:59, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Since you asked for recommendations, the only recommendation I thought of awhile back was that since Sanger is very much an advocate of early childhood reading and writing (I get it, as my sainted mom had me reading and writing by the time I got to kindergarten), and since that fits right in with the concept of the world's knowledge being available free to anyone (they have to know how to read to actually accept that gift), maybe Sanger could be asked to chair some kind of WMF monetary distribution to increase worldwide very young child literacy. Alongside a WMF program having the same goal? They both might be able to team up on something like that. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:52, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I may be too pessimistic but I think that Larry Sanger has gone so far off the rails that any useful collaboration with him is highly unlikely. Cullen328 (talk) 09:45, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    If a project would greatly benefit early childhood reading and writing I have faith that our fellow Wikipedian would at least listen. It rises above political views. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:55, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    This is not a matter of political differences. The fact of the matter is that Sanger has been demonstrably and repeatedly and spectacularly wrong about online encyclopedias for decades, and is now engaging in hallucinatory, evidence free attacks on Wikipedia. He is encouraging an increasingly authoritarian regime to "investigate" the project, which is a euphemism for industrial strength harassment. Civility is not a suicide pact. Cullen328 (talk) 22:36, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I think most here are happy to see an Wikipedia:Academic bias because most of the sources used in non-popculture articles are academic in nature.
    *Jimbo said years ago "The type of people who were drawn to writing an encyclopedia for fun tend to be pretty smart people."
    Moxy🍁 01:19, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    I made a thing that some may find interesting

    I wrote a script which I can feed a Wikipedia url and then it does the following: fetch the article, fetch all the external sources, get the text of those sources, and then feed it to a large language model which is asked two questions, first about whether there's information in the sources which should be in the Wikipedia entry, and second about whether there's information in the article which is not supported by the sources.

    It is not well tested! I'm just sharing information here. I've put a first example on the talk page for Esther Meynell. Jimbo Wales (talk) 20:35, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&oldid=1280305372"