Morpheus
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2017
- Messages
- 3,060
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
I came across this thread on reddit. It talks about how indian user should slowly edit articles on wiki. It even talks about how to evade detection, and how to do it in detail.
-------------
A Guide to Countering the Anti-India and Anti-Hindu Bias on Wikipedia, AMA.
If you didn't know, Wikipedia is one of the 5 most visited sites on the Internet.
Students, academics, journalists, everyone uses Wikipedia to get 'facts' from it. Even though many of us understand the anti-India and anti-Hindu bias on the site, most people don't know about and take the information on there for face value.
Please share this guide with as many people as you want or like.
I wanted to put together a guide on how to use Wikipedia right, and avoid the pitfalls from it. If you don't understand the rules of engagement, you will get your work banned quickly.
So who am I? I write on Wikipedia with a different IP address, and a different username. I've used Wikipedia to create articles that gets picked up by the media. I've used it to feed news cycles. I've also been quietly fighting the anti-India bias on the site. I've got a few thousand edits on the site, and I've learned a lot of the unsaid rules of the game. Follow them and you will go much further with your edits. I do this because of my ties to some pro-Bharat orgs whose work I believe in and who are constantly unfairly scrutinized. I've also been successful in having 2-3 very negative anti-Hindu accounts banned indefinitely (this is much much harder than it looks).
So how do you do this?
Obviously, this is nonsense since everyone has a bias, but you must always appear like you're unbiased.
3. Pick a truly neutral topic that won't get much attention and start building an edit history in that topic. Keep an eye on your user page and talk page. Make sure people aren't leaving you warnings, or anything like that. You must rack up a good 15-20-30 edits that are neutral and accepted so you can show that you understand how Wikipedia's rules work and you have experienced. This will give you credibility in the future. This will also help you edit the "locked" pages where only experienced editors can do it. 4. Cite, cite, cite your sources. Find a source for every edit you make. Ideally from a third party scholarly website. I'd recommend using Google Scholar, or other search engines to find a paper from the perspective you want to defend. 5. There's a rule for everything. The key to having your edits stick on Wikipedia is to understand exactly which policies to invoke when someone argues against you. I would type "WP:NPOV" in the search bar and start there. That will be the first entry point into this whole maze. 6. Editing by attrition. Don't think you will change the entire article in one go. Edit frequently, edit a lot. Make each edit and save the changes. This makes it harder to revert changes by other editors. I also recommend the attrition strategy. This means start off with a mild edit in a controversial article and once you see it is accepted, make a bolder edit. Keep going again and again. 7. Use the talk page. The talk page of a Wikipedia article is where the real debates happen. I recommend having multiple users (do NOT create multiple accounts from the same computer--that will get exposed quickly!) building consensus...this means all the users should agree with one another about a positive change.
Wikipedia runs on consensus. If 2-5 people agree that so-and-so is a good edit to keep, then it sticks.
If some other idiot comes by and removes the edit, you revert his change, go onto his user page and leave him a warning (there are template warnings you can use that get tracked by Wikipedia admins). If that person does not comply and keeps making bad edits, that person can get banned for a short term, and then ultimately forever (you have to go the Wikipedia Arbitration Committee for that, but as long as they see a track record of all this, they will usually side with you).
The goal is to create a group of users who are focused on a pro-India and pro-Hindu narrative and have each other building consensus on these topics...not those overly critical of the topic.
These 7 guidelines will do a lot to help you build a pro-India and pro-Hindu narrative on Wikipedia which has no far unfairly taken just the worst and most negative and critical parts of the narrative and put it up there.
Ask me Anything and I will try to get back to you.
Please do not try to find me on Wikipedia. If there is another person with this username, he/she has nothing to do with me.
-------------------------------------
This post is now at the bottom of the IndiaSpeaks page, so I am assuming its lifespan is almost done, but one last idea if you want to make an impact:
If we can get enough people, I'd recommend a deep Wikipedia dive.
Most of these users are touching the high visibility articles. Think about the latest news item, political figures, etc.
But to win on Wikipedia, we can play the long game, which involves focusing on the low visibility, high impact articles.
For example, one thing we can do collectively is to re-claim the Swastika article and disassociate it completely from Nazi ideology. After all, it was never meant to be the Swastika, it was meant to be a hooked cross.
So, you have to edit all those smaller articles where this association is made and then start changing the narrative slowly.
----------
I can't publicly say that you should do this.
Publicly, I cannot support this idea since coordinating offline reveals a conspiracy which can make edits on Wikipedia void and null and your account banned.
Publicly, I can say that that I've never done this myself or do it.
All these are my public statements.
Privately coordinating on a discord channel would need to have vetted users only who can keep the group private and would need to write in distinct enough voices and post at different times to not appear coordinated.
Since such a thing is not possible to do or viable, I cannot publically support the idea.
This is my public statement.
-------------------------
-------------------
These people are now working to edit every wiki article they can. Wiki is the front source nowadays for most information. This is a alarming situation now. Full Nazi playbook tactics.
@Foxtrot Alpha @The Eagle 5th Generation warfare is in full swing. If you go check Kashmir wiki articles now, you will see some of them have been edited. Same for Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh.
-------------
A Guide to Countering the Anti-India and Anti-Hindu Bias on Wikipedia, AMA.
If you didn't know, Wikipedia is one of the 5 most visited sites on the Internet.
Students, academics, journalists, everyone uses Wikipedia to get 'facts' from it. Even though many of us understand the anti-India and anti-Hindu bias on the site, most people don't know about and take the information on there for face value.
Please share this guide with as many people as you want or like.
I wanted to put together a guide on how to use Wikipedia right, and avoid the pitfalls from it. If you don't understand the rules of engagement, you will get your work banned quickly.
So who am I? I write on Wikipedia with a different IP address, and a different username. I've used Wikipedia to create articles that gets picked up by the media. I've used it to feed news cycles. I've also been quietly fighting the anti-India bias on the site. I've got a few thousand edits on the site, and I've learned a lot of the unsaid rules of the game. Follow them and you will go much further with your edits. I do this because of my ties to some pro-Bharat orgs whose work I believe in and who are constantly unfairly scrutinized. I've also been successful in having 2-3 very negative anti-Hindu accounts banned indefinitely (this is much much harder than it looks).
So how do you do this?
- Make an account on Wikipedia. Be absolutely sure you pick a username that in no way can be traced back to you. I've seen some remarkable stupidity in sharing details about who a person is just from their usernames. Even the name itself has a bias in it. If you pick "HinduWarrior123" that shows a clear bias. Pick an unbiased name.
- Craft a profile. Turn on Visual Editor for easier editing, and go into your userpage and craft details that you see fit for the user you just made. I won't say you should lie here, but I would not put information on here to show any bias that might come back to you. For example, I like to mention that I am from Germany. This is not false, since I've lived a short amount of time there, but it doesn't reveal any specific bias.
Obviously, this is nonsense since everyone has a bias, but you must always appear like you're unbiased.
3. Pick a truly neutral topic that won't get much attention and start building an edit history in that topic. Keep an eye on your user page and talk page. Make sure people aren't leaving you warnings, or anything like that. You must rack up a good 15-20-30 edits that are neutral and accepted so you can show that you understand how Wikipedia's rules work and you have experienced. This will give you credibility in the future. This will also help you edit the "locked" pages where only experienced editors can do it. 4. Cite, cite, cite your sources. Find a source for every edit you make. Ideally from a third party scholarly website. I'd recommend using Google Scholar, or other search engines to find a paper from the perspective you want to defend. 5. There's a rule for everything. The key to having your edits stick on Wikipedia is to understand exactly which policies to invoke when someone argues against you. I would type "WP:NPOV" in the search bar and start there. That will be the first entry point into this whole maze. 6. Editing by attrition. Don't think you will change the entire article in one go. Edit frequently, edit a lot. Make each edit and save the changes. This makes it harder to revert changes by other editors. I also recommend the attrition strategy. This means start off with a mild edit in a controversial article and once you see it is accepted, make a bolder edit. Keep going again and again. 7. Use the talk page. The talk page of a Wikipedia article is where the real debates happen. I recommend having multiple users (do NOT create multiple accounts from the same computer--that will get exposed quickly!) building consensus...this means all the users should agree with one another about a positive change.
Wikipedia runs on consensus. If 2-5 people agree that so-and-so is a good edit to keep, then it sticks.
If some other idiot comes by and removes the edit, you revert his change, go onto his user page and leave him a warning (there are template warnings you can use that get tracked by Wikipedia admins). If that person does not comply and keeps making bad edits, that person can get banned for a short term, and then ultimately forever (you have to go the Wikipedia Arbitration Committee for that, but as long as they see a track record of all this, they will usually side with you).
The goal is to create a group of users who are focused on a pro-India and pro-Hindu narrative and have each other building consensus on these topics...not those overly critical of the topic.
These 7 guidelines will do a lot to help you build a pro-India and pro-Hindu narrative on Wikipedia which has no far unfairly taken just the worst and most negative and critical parts of the narrative and put it up there.
Ask me Anything and I will try to get back to you.
Please do not try to find me on Wikipedia. If there is another person with this username, he/she has nothing to do with me.
-------------------------------------
This post is now at the bottom of the IndiaSpeaks page, so I am assuming its lifespan is almost done, but one last idea if you want to make an impact:
If we can get enough people, I'd recommend a deep Wikipedia dive.
Most of these users are touching the high visibility articles. Think about the latest news item, political figures, etc.
But to win on Wikipedia, we can play the long game, which involves focusing on the low visibility, high impact articles.
For example, one thing we can do collectively is to re-claim the Swastika article and disassociate it completely from Nazi ideology. After all, it was never meant to be the Swastika, it was meant to be a hooked cross.
So, you have to edit all those smaller articles where this association is made and then start changing the narrative slowly.
----------
I can't publicly say that you should do this.
Publicly, I cannot support this idea since coordinating offline reveals a conspiracy which can make edits on Wikipedia void and null and your account banned.
Publicly, I can say that that I've never done this myself or do it.
All these are my public statements.
Privately coordinating on a discord channel would need to have vetted users only who can keep the group private and would need to write in distinct enough voices and post at different times to not appear coordinated.
Since such a thing is not possible to do or viable, I cannot publically support the idea.
This is my public statement.
-------------------------
-------------------
These people are now working to edit every wiki article they can. Wiki is the front source nowadays for most information. This is a alarming situation now. Full Nazi playbook tactics.
@Foxtrot Alpha @The Eagle 5th Generation warfare is in full swing. If you go check Kashmir wiki articles now, you will see some of them have been edited. Same for Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh.
Last edited:
