Russia needs own alternative to Wikipedia

[senheiser]

ITAR-TASS: Non-political - Russia needs own alternative to Wikipedia
Non-political
April 04, 18:43 UTC+4
Russian-language edition of Wikipedia receives about one million queries per hour

© EPA/BORIS ROESSLER


ST. PETERSBURG, April 04. /ITAR-TASS/. Anton Likhomanov, the director general of the National Library of Russia, the oldest public library in the country, has suggested creating an information and reference web resource in Russia that can serve as an alternative to Wikipedia.

“Wikipedia’s Russian-language edition receives about one million queries per hour, but the resource contains a great number of mistakes, which can hardly be corrected,” Likhomanov told a pedagogical forum on Friday.

He recalled that Wikipedia was controlled from the United States and at any moment Russian people could face the same situation as with international payment systems Visa and MasterCard, which had stopped serving clients of several Russian lenders due to US sanctions.

Likhomanov noted that there had been attempts to create an alternative web resource in the past. However, they had not been brought to fruition. Today, “it is high time” for that, he said.

 

[Jaanbaz]

So Putin's SS can decide what information Russians read especially history.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

I think the #3 person at wiki is a Russian woman. The #2 is Dutch.

 

[Broccoli]

Russian authorities don't want people to read something what differences from "official truth".

 

[vostok]

Competition creates leaders. The more analogues of Wikipedia - the more accurate information.

 

[SOHEIL]

Russian authorities don't want people to read something what differences from "official truth".

do you really think Wikipedia is independent !?

 

[Thəorətic Muslim]

First Page: VODKA

 

[Hasbara Buster]

Russian authorities don't want people to read something what differences from "official truth".

Wrong, you should have asked yourself "who controls Wikipedia?"

They have an army of editors who in the end decide what is "accurate" and what is not. On certain topics there is massive pro-western propaganda. Haven't you ever noticed this yourself? Or do you get your information on mainstream western media like most people?

 

[livingdead]

Wrong, you should have asked yourself "who controls Wikipedia?"

They have an army of editors who in the end decide what is "accurate" and what is not. On certain topics there is massive pro-western propaganda. Haven't you ever noticed this yourself? Or do you get your information on mainstream western media like most people?

because most of the contributor happen to be from west. At least the English language version.
If lot of russians participate, it can change. Can you give an example of a biased entry?

 

[Hasbara Buster]

BTW, the CIA was exposed back in 2007 for tampering with content posted on wikipedia. A tool known as "Wikipedia Scanner" revealed that the CIA was an active manipulator of information.

The US military has also been exposed tampering with the information on the site. They have editted tens of thousands of Wikipedia entries.

 

[Desertfalcon]

Wrong, you should have asked yourself "who controls Wikipedia?"

They have an army of editors who in the end decide what is "accurate" and what is not. On certain topics there is massive pro-western propaganda. Haven't you ever noticed this yourself? Or do you get your information on mainstream western media like most people?

Not on the Russian language Wiki. And their "army of editors"...are their readers in Russian, who are certainly...almost all Russian citizens given the volume of Russian language queries. Almost anyone can apply and be accepted to edit any Wiki article. I am one of them. What happens however is that their are so MANY people, and so many who are knowledgeable, that if you edit and write into his entry that George Bush is actually an alien from Mars without any reputable source, the shear volume of people reading and editing it constantly will ensure that such silly info will be immediately removed. So to with any attempts to "whitewash" any ugly fact of say, Soviet history, that some may not like.

BTW, the CIA was exposed back in 2007 for tampering with content posted on wikipedia. A tool known as "Wikipedia Scanner" revealed that the CIA was an active manipulator of information.

And were immediately caught by that program, WikiScanner, and the articles were changed back, just as they would be for anyone else making bogus entries. That's the beauty of Wiki. As they themselves stated after that incident...

"However, she said, "Wikipedia is self-correcting," meaning misleading entries can be quickly revised by another editor. She said Wikimedia welcomed the WikiScanner."