I understand the high level of interest that exists on this project about the ANI vs. WikiMedia case but I think we have to use the same guidelines we use in content creation to determine the reliability of the sources of information we come across to learn new developments on this case. There are articles claiming that WikiMedia has turned over the personal information of these 3 editors to the Indian court but buried in this story you cite, WMF states that they have not turned over any information nor sent notifications to these editors yet. With so much contradictory information circulating oline, I think editors have to use their considerable editing skills to assess what is going on in this case in these days before December 16th, the next court date, so as not fall prey to disinformation. LizRead!Talk!00:12, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This has been one of the most difficult stories to cover as a Signpost editor, and I wrote up the Framgate "constitutional crisis" synopsis! There's a combination of community pre-pushback on covering legal matters, opacity from the Foundation, press intentionally muddying the waters (IMHO), threat of SLAPP lawsuits, and a lack of Signpost staff to adequately chase down everything we would like to do. In the interest of the community knowledge about this crucial matter, I've pushed for the last two issues to include whatever information that we had at hand, even if it's not perfectly polished. ☆ Bri (talk) 00:20, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
← Back to In the media