Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Please vote for keeping the article about Artix on Wikipedia! (Read 2219 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Please vote for keeping the article about Artix on Wikipedia!

Reply #1 –
Thank you to all who participate into voting.

However, I would like to clearly express my displeasure with wikipedia in general, which does not deserve the name encyclopedia. It is a tightly controlled indoctrination platform with a questionable agenda that should be boycotted and avoided.

Re: Please vote for keeping the article about Artix on Wikipedia!

Reply #2 –
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Editor-1

The proposer for deletion uses Debian, Xubuntu, Fedora and Centos, all  systemd OS's, so may be biased. He is also part of some Wikipedia deletion project, so I think this is just a normal part of operations, to question if something is still relevant. But when you read the notability guidelines (if you can stay awake that long) there should be no problem, things don't even have to be cited in the article. Artix isn't some wallpaper makeover nobody uses. If the worst happens save a copy of the page and post the info somewhere else. I'm sure there are alternative online encyclopedias, and actually regardless of what happens, perhaps those should be supported too if anyone gets to doing it. I find Wikipedia has helpful information but any single source should be viewed along with others, incorrect things get repeated online sometimes, and there is much still unknown.

Re: Please vote for keeping the article about Artix on Wikipedia!

Reply #3 –
There are many ways to think about it.
1. They are trying to reduce the number of articles and save resources.
2. They do not know the real background of Artix.
3. They are trying to hide and erase us.

Forget Wikipedia or other 3rd parties, put the information on your personal website.

Re: Please vote for keeping the article about Artix on Wikipedia!

Reply #4 –
I don't think there's any ill will or malice, Artix is a small community and not commonly talked about outside of this site. I don't necessarily agree they should remove the article, but I don't think it's a great offense that some think it should be deleted or merged with Arch's article.

Re: Please vote for keeping the article about Artix on Wikipedia!

Reply #5 –
Should any of you vote for keeping the article, please keep in mind:
 - Do not just vote, state a valid reason. Best one is stressing the notability of Softpedia and Distrowatch which is challenged by the people who vote for deletion.
 - Preferably use an existing WP account; unsigned votes don't  help, neither newly created accounts.
 - Best one: use any influence you have over friends or acquaintances on 'mainstream' sites to publish a review on Artix. Blog posts and one-line RSS news don't count.

I don't generally think Wikipedia is the mother of all knowledge, but nevertheless is a source of information for a lot of people, so it's better to have a stand-alone article there.

Re: Please vote for keeping the article about Artix on Wikipedia!

Reply #6 –
Quote from: artoo – on
Thank you to all who participate into voting.

However, I would like to clearly express my displeasure with wikipedia in general, which does not deserve the name encyclopedia. It is a tightly controlled indoctrination platform with a questionable agenda that should be boycotted and avoided.
I fully agree. There have been many, many, many times where I've been reading an article on Wikipedia and the wording is obviously biased in favor of some opinion. ESPECIALLY if it's an article that is even slightly related to politics in any way. I remember once having a look at their article on Donald Trump and saw a link to another article talking about all these bad things that he'd done. Although now that article is no longer linked on their article on Donald Trump.

But anyway, on that article, right at the top it said something like "Donald Trump has been shown to be a bad person". The wording was a bit different, but it basically outright said that he was a bad person...that doesn't sound like the words that a neutral and unbiased documenter would use.

Unfortunately I can't seem to find that article anymore, so I can't prove my claim. But my point is that Wikipedia is definitely biased and does not have a neutral stance when documenting plenty of different things (especially related to politics).
 

Re: Please vote for keeping the article about Artix on Wikipedia!

Reply #7 –
I happened to be watching live pictures on Al Jazeera when Gaddafi was captured in the afternoon. He was obviously alive, but later footage showed him dead in the back of a truck. By the evening news the story was he had been killed in battle and the pictures just seemed to show he was alive but wasn't. At least you can read on Wikipedia about the various accounts. He would probably have been executed later like Saddam Hussein anyway. Here they are NOT censoring something that others did.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Muammar_Gaddafi
Sometimes Wikipedia will point you towards the truth when others have hidden it, but any good historian or researcher should always check facts with other sources and try to get back to original records if possible, it's like when something you know about is in the papers and sometimes they get a few details wrong, you should expect that.
Most stuff I look up on Wikipedia is stuff like laptop models and their features, so that's pretty unbiased.