The Encyclosphere Thread

budoslavic

Owl
Gold Member
What is "Encyclosphere"? As we all know about Wikipedia's rampant left-wing bias and propaganda, an alternative online encyclopedia platform called Encyclosphere is about to be released soon.

Here is where it gets interesting: it's being developed by the original (former) Wikipedia co-founder, Larry Sanger.

The purpose of this thread is to post news, tweets, etc. and discuss anything related to Encyclosphere.

Wikipedia’s Founder is Creating New Free Speech Competitor to Website, Citing Leftist Domination​

Larry Sanger is the original creator of Wikipedia.

The man who originally created online encyclopedia Wikipedia is pledging to create a new platform to replace it, citing Wikipedia’s left-wing bias.

Larry Sanger, who co-founded Wikipedia in 2001 before leaving the project, is describing his Encyclosphere as a networked aggregation of existing and new encyclopedia content, which will be distinguished from the colorful and unverified content slung onto Wikipedia by the site’s user base. Sanger envisions millions of people writing and submitting encyclopedia entries, which can be rated and judged for accuracy by their readers themselves, rather than the “arrogant and controlling oligarchy” Sanger maintains is running Wikipedia.


Sanger admitted that Wikipedia had become “badly biased” last year, citing the use of political propaganda by establishment editors on the site who consistently lock down articles pertaining to publicly discussed topics and figures.

Sanger cited pages documenting the history of the Soviet Union as an example of Wikipedia bias in remarks provided to Just the News on Friday. He’s previously cited Wikipedia pages for Donald Trump and Jesus Christ as examples of the thick leftist bias on the platform, disregarding Wikipedia’s old “no point of view” policy in favor of content that serves as little more than left-wing hitpieces.

Left-wing operatives, at times paid by powerful interests, use Wikipedia’s seniority system to defame conservatives and protect the reputations of their own progressive and liberal daddies. Allegations of child grooming and wide-ranging sexual harassment were hidden from the page of Lincoln Project pedophile John Weaver, with leftist editors claiming the information wasn’t relevant.


Wikipedia may very well be the most compromised and deceptive Big Tech platform present on the internet, using faux status as a neutral encyclopedia to defame conservatives and right-wingers. More disturbingly, Wikipedia has been used to distort historical events and culture, advancing the philosophy of hate under the guise of the 13th most popular website on the internet.

Sanger’s project may present a desperately needed alternative, and may recapture the Internet’s original spirit of free expression and the flow of information.

Encyclosphere website -
 
Last edited:

budoslavic

Owl
Gold Member
Video description: "The Encyclosphere will be a decentralized, leaderless, centerless network of encyclopedic content, which does for encyclopedias what the Blogosphere did for blogs. But to make such a network, we need encyclopedia format standards. Wikipedia ex-founder Larry Sanger is starting the Knowledge Standards Foundation to convene a discussion and coding efforts to creating such standards."


Shorter clip
 

Aizen

Kingfisher
Sounds great, it's about time that a competitor to Wikipedia emerged. Even better that it's the founder introducing it. Hopefully they include an Early Life section.
 

prendergast

Sparrow
The issue with notoriously leftie Wikipedia is that people treat it as a definitive source of knowledge when it's really not. Ask any famous person what they think about their Wikipedia article and there's a good chance that they will tell you it's a crock of s---. Also, if you're an expert on any topic the Wikipedia articles based on your expertise will just seem simplistic or just flat-out wrong.

Wikipedia is only accurate up to a certain degree. The fact of the matter is that an article will emphasise or omit certain facts depending on if they adhere to the leftist agenda. It's good as an entry-level source and nothing more.

Also, the perception that Wikipedia is free to edit by anybody is simply a myth. Around seventy seven percent of Wikipedia articles are edited by one percent of editors: https://www.techspot.com/community/...ritten-by-just-one-percent-of-editors.242242/. In fact, did you know that around a third of articles have been edited by one person? The guy seems nice and all, and he does it for free


I do like the idea of a small group of people being in control of editing Wikipedia so that normies don't muck it up, but it's clear this one percent has a political agenda that is an anathema to truth.

What we need is a group of intellectuals who actually know what they are talking about to get together to write an encyclopaedia. These intellectuals should not have any political motivations and should only be out to disseminate the truth to the laypeople.

The Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition (1911) is a perfect example of this. The philosophy entries were contributed to by Bertrand Russell and the physics entries by Albert Einstein (though I don't know if Einstein worked on the 1911 edition in particular). Many people seem to think that the 1911 edition is the best encyclopaedia of all time and there's a good reason for that. Also, it has been denounced by contemporary critics for being "racist" and "sexist" so you just know it's a good read.

An historical example of a bad encyclopaedia would be the eighteenth century Encyclopédie written by the Encyclopédistes. They were a group of French scholars who basically wanted to sneak their Enlightenment values into the encyclopaedia so that it could convert the masses. Denis Diderot was one of the contributors.

We need another 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica.
 
Last edited:

Coja Petrus Uscan

Hummingbird
Gold Member
Wikipedia are promoting women's history day/month:


Happy International Women's Day!
(and Women's History Month)​


Wikipedia hosts 1.7 million biographies. Not even 20 % of those are about women. If Wikipedia wants to become the sum of human knowledge, this needs to change. With such a large gender gap, we are far from reaching the goal. International Women's Day is an important moment to remind ourselves of the gender gap for women and all underrepresented groups and to renew our efforts to close it.

This page gathers several events that take place on or around International Women's Day (8 March) and Women's History Month in March 2021, and where the goal is to come closer to closing the gender gap. Do you want to take part? Think about what you want to do and what languages you want to write in. Take a look at the events that are planned below, and sign up!

They are promoting a number of schemes:

WikiGapEvents globally focusing on closing the gender gap on Wikipedia, by writing new articles about prominent women.


Art+FeminismAn international community that strives to close the information gap about gender, feminism, and the arts on the internet.

They have also endorsed everything else under the sun:


Rough quote from Larry Sanger,

"Wikipedia is replete with statements that a Republican would never make, in headline political and cultural articles. It is not an encyclopedia"
 
Top