The crying “History” button at the top right sends its regards. Yes, the World Jewish Congress has published a report that demands Wikipedia add a feature to view the history of articles, see what actions were performed by whom, and “host forums and discussions within the Wikipedia community to address concerns about neutrality and gather feedback for policy improvements”. It also wants to force all admins and above to reveal their real names.

  • Aatube@kbin.socialOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    That’s correct, except it’s still considered a primary source, which can be cited to see what a group said if due.

    • spujb@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      wait can you clarify? this comment made me more confused /gen if you are willing

      • Aatube@kbin.socialOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Primary sources and research cannot be cited to support objective facts. However, they can be used to cite criticism from a group. The only difference with your original reply is that being cited as criticism instead of fact does not magically make the source secondary.

        • spujb@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          okay gotcha thanks for the clarification! love me an internet discussion that ends with me being smarter