English Wikipedia && Belarus
I have discovered Wikipedia more than two and a half years ago. Since then I’ve used it regularly as a quick reference, and I also used to contribute to it a little bit, mostly to the articles about Belarus. Since then several Russian contributors (who openly express pro-imperial, pro-Soviet, anti-Western, anti-Belarusian and anti-Ukrainian political views) removed a lot of important factual information from Belarus-related articles that showed Russia and USSR in a bad light and inserted information with a pro-Russian and pro-Soviet spin (”POV” as it’s called in Wiki-jargon).
It was done slowly, in small chunks, here and there, by stealthily hiding edits or by stubbornly engaging in a reversal war. There are dozens of concrete examples. And the good thing about Wikipedia is that everything is documented. It’s possible to provide links to any version of a given encyclopedia article or a link to a web page that compares any two versions of the given article.
It would probably take me at least 3-4 hours to search through the relevant Wikipedia articles’ editing history and find most of those links. I’m a bit reluctant to do that, first because it’s not that interesting for me (I already know what’s going on), and maybe it would be not so interesting to the readers (because in some cases you have to have certain knowledge about historical events in the region, in order to see how those Russian contributors twist the facts), it could be obscure and boring to some of you. But, if there’s an interest, just tell me, maybe I’ll write a big blog entry about it.
This continuing butchering of the articles about Belarus by Russians on English Wikipedia also ruined my trust in the Wikipedia as a whole. Now, I have to confess, I don’t go to Wikipedia anymore to read about political or historical events, and only go to Wikipedia when I need to check something on natural sciences (biology, archeology, physics, math…)
April 29th, 2006 at 7:54 pm
I agree that doing the research may not be too useful for some readers, but this blog post is an interesting and important one. I also have used Wikipedia for a wide range of sources and blindly trusted that people who run it keep things like this from happening. Though it makes me very frustrated, thanks for shedding light on this issue.
April 29th, 2006 at 9:29 pm
The only way we can correct point-of-view editing like this is if people who can recognize it do what they can to fix it, or point it out to those who will. If you’re willing to make the effort, I for one would greatly appreciate your work.
You can collect history or diff links on your user page, or create a user subpage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:USERNAME/SUBPAGENAME), in preparation for your blog post. Link to the information on the Belarus talk page, the Village Pump, and the Administrator’s Noticeboard, and you will be able to gather some people willing to work on achieving a Neutral Point of View for the article.
Of course it will be most helpful if you can provide citations to show where the current articles are lacking or are in error.
We know that political articles like this are always going to a minefield, and are never going to be allowed to grow in peace, but that doesn’t mean we must abandon them to those who care more about their “side” than the truth.
Thank you for caring, and for saying something about it.
April 29th, 2006 at 10:03 pm
I mostly use Wikipedia as a dictionnary when I’m too lazy to go an pick mine, but I know that sometimes I use it as I would use an enchyclopedia to have some facts about countries.
I figured due to some patriotism of some sort that what I read can be a bit untrue, but I never put too much attention to it.
History, facts and all things that need to be known about a country have always interested me. Reading a blog post would be of interest for me.
April 29th, 2006 at 10:22 pm
While Wikipedia is an interesting concept, I’ve found myself becoming increasingly wary about it because anybody, no matter how informed or uninformed about the topic at hand, can make entries into it (meaning what one is reading could be less scholarly, factual or authoritative than one would hope). The POV flaming on Belarusian topics is especially conspicuous. Take anything found on Wikipedia (or the Internet) with a grain of salt, and check it against other sources. Like anything in life, it can be fun and even useful, but must be used with caution.
April 29th, 2006 at 11:48 pm
It should be noted that some wienies expressed their zeal to launch a narkamauka (sovietized Belarusian language) wiki. There’s a raunchy argument going on at the Wiki meta section, but it seems to me their real intention is to destroy what now exists. They wouldn’t care to post anything, it’s all because of their opposition to taraskievica, a traditional Belarusian spelling, and not out of a genuine intention to post anything to Wiki. Tell me if I’m wrong.
April 30th, 2006 at 12:22 am
Yes.. the inherent flaw of wikipedia is that just about anyone can change or add things… It might be possible to have the administrators lock the articles you are referring to br23… to prevent others from ever changing them again. But I dont know if the people from wikipedia will grant such a request. Showing proof of misinformation by showing written facts may help.
Ive known for quite some time that various facts are being twisted and mangled or even erased… And Ive thought up a plan to index and preserve anything related to Belarus in a shielded database so only trusted people are allowed to change or add things. Unfortunately this plan is on the backburner as I havent had the time to program the advanced spider it would require :(
April 30th, 2006 at 12:58 am
Endrus: I don’t have anything against narkamauka per se, as long as we keep the politics out of it. And I don’t see a need for another Wikipedia version, because (1) the two spelling systems are very-very close; (2) Probably 99% of differences between the Classical and Soviet orthography can be done by an automatic converter such as a PHP script (replacing soft signs, soft/hard l’s, e vs ie, etc.).
Can you provide the link to the discussion?
April 30th, 2006 at 4:47 am
Yes, sure. Here it is. Scroll down to the “Present Belarusian” part, and you’ll find it.
April 30th, 2006 at 8:03 am
This comment isnt much related to this article but more on the link endrus posted.
I know too little of the Belarusian language(s?) to make sense of it… As far as I do understand.. is that it has been constantly overhauled and changed over decades… I remember somewhere that there are no fixed rules or guidelines for writing Belarusian… may be wrong… its a long time ago. Russification indeed plays a large role in the whole thing. There’s quite a heated discussion on that link. I dunno but would it be feasible to set up a meeting with everyone contributing to the Belarusian wiki page as well with a number of linguists from all the various forms… Not to cast votes or anything.. but more to work out a version of Belarusian that everyone is comfortable with. Please correct me if im wrong… to me it seems like the language itself has become fragmented… and everyone decided to stick with one fragment or another etc etc… Just like my sister a long time ago said you (br32) write bad Belarusian… It’s strange for me as you both speak the same language. Some on that page speak about reviving the language… what about repairing what’s left of it, documenting it and setting it as an official standard? Or am I going too far? I dont know if anyone has dont this before or if so, that it was successfull. Like I said… I know almost nothing so please dont take anything as offensive.
April 30th, 2006 at 8:15 am
Don’t give up to this шпана. They give Russia a bad name. Kuban Kazak doesn’t represent anything.
Besides, if you can document stealth edits and prove them wrong, then it’s a criminal offence. The “counter vandalism unit” in Hebrew Wikipedia weren’t afraid to complain to the Israeli police about serial vandals. The only problem i can see here is that the EN WP is too big to notice such a small issue
April 30th, 2006 at 3:09 pm
endrus: Thanks. I wrote this (my two cents ;)):
WEAK OPPOSE. I don’t have anything against Soviet spelling (narkamauka) per se, as long as we keep the politics out of it. And I don’t see a need for another Wikipedia version, because (1) the two spelling systems are very-very close. It’s the same language, just the spelling rules are a little bit different; (2) Probably 99% of differences between the Classical and Soviet orthography can be automatically converted by a simple programming script (replacing soft signs, soft/hard l’s, e vs ie, etc.).
But even if the Wikipedia community decides to have a separate version for the Soviet spelling (which I find bizarre), I don’t really oppose it that strongly, because it’s still our language, it’s just spelled a little bit differently in some cases. Let them spell that way, if they want to, though I find it a bit destructive that they want to do it in a separate Wikipedia (is it a political, not a linguistic decision?)
P.S. Frankly speaking, I’m much more concerned about the fact that certain Russian contributors on the English Wikipedia have been butchering Belarus-related articles on WP in the last year, deleting factual information and inserting pro-imperial, pro-Russian, pro-Soviet POV.
April 30th, 2006 at 3:42 pm
endrus: I find it even more bizarre that the same guy named Trasianka Editor (a very telling username, btw) also proposes to open a separate West-Polessian Wikipedia (on the same page). I wonder if the that “Trasianka man” could show us his own writings in this “West-Polessian” language and show us Web pages in that langauge…
April 30th, 2006 at 6:06 pm
Well, you see, there you go! I guess their whole premise is inane. This is just a destructive argument. I greatly doubt they would post anything to that soviet-style wiki. Wikipedia is the community of enthusiasts. Now, have you seen a single (sic!) narkamauka user with explicitly pro-Soviet views who would care to do anything gratis for the Belarusian cause? Doubtly… Maybe it’s just me being not too attentive. But I haven’t.
May 1st, 2006 at 10:35 am
[…] br23 blog writes about edit wars constantly taking place at Wikipedia’s Belarusian history pages: “This continuing butchering of the articles about Belarus by Russians on English Wikipedia also ruined my trust in the Wikipedia as a whole. Now, I have to confess, I don’t go to Wikipedia anymore to read about political or historical events, and only go to Wikipedia when I need to check something on natural sciences (biology, archeology, physics, math…)” […]
May 4th, 2006 at 5:17 am
If you are Belarusian and have something to say to Western reader about Belarus - send it to The Virtual Guide to Belarus. No Russians will reach it there and it is on top of Wikipedia in Google :)
http://www.belarusguide.com
May 29th, 2006 at 10:16 am
[…] I only applaud this idea–and think that it can somehow address the problems that arise with Wikipedia. I remember a post from BR23 about the history of Belarus-Russia relations and how the content was always changed due to Wikipedia wars…Perhaps, the FT initiative can be a very sound mechanism for providing the objectivity what Wikipedia often fails to deliver. […]
June 2nd, 2006 at 8:53 am
Oh! I agree completely!
October 25th, 2007 at 7:39 pm
A man is trying a very unusual way to propose to his girlfriend. He wants people to forward an email to as many people as possible and he hopes that it will eventually get to his girlfriend. Details here: http://www.proposal-to-mary.com
Here is what he wants people to send by email:
You could help me a lot to spread my proposal to Mary – it is important that it is distributed as widely as possible so that it eventually reaches Mary. If you would like to support my proposal to Mary, please send the following text by email to a lot of people :-)
————- SNIP (email text end) —————
WHEN YOU RECEIVE THIS, PLEASE HELP TO DISTRIBUTE IT TO OTHER PEOPLE!
For a long time I have tried to find a special way to propose marriage to my girlfriend Mary, whom I know for five years now. I wanted it very special, romantic and memorable, something our grandchildren would still remember.
And here is my idea: I will send out the proposal to Mary to 50 complete strangers, people I don’t know - hoping, that they will forward my proposal to as many people as possible, which in turn forward it etc. And some day, I hope, it will reach Mary, after it has travelled a very long way. I know, it will take a long time and I am quite nervous…
From the poem MY Mary will know immediately that the proposal is for her.
I have created a homepage ( http://www.proposal-to-mary.com ) where you can find the current status of my quest. You can use the homepage to check if the proposal has already reached Mary (in that case it is not necessary anymore to forward the mail).
Once the proposal has reached Mary, I will put a note on these pages. Also I will publish there how many people have read the proposal so that everybody can see how far it has spread and that it is getting closer to Mary.
And of course you will find there what I am waiting for most: Mary’s answer! I can’t tell you, how nervous I am… Will she accept my proposal? Will she like the unusual way how she got it, through the hands of thousands of messengers all over the world?
Please cross your fingers for me! And please - help me by sending the mail to as many people as possible, to help it spread, so that it eventually reaches Mary.
And here is my proposal:
Mary, please forgive me, as you know English is not my native language. And I am not a poet. But I mean it from my heart.
My angel,
Five years ago, I will always remember the day When fate made us meet, blissful Alaskan moments in May Earth spun around us and a journey began Love, warmth, happiness, enough the years to span.
The longer it lasts the more grows our bond And with 80 still - of you I will be fond Whatever happens, I will stay at your side Through good and bad, together let us stride
No second with you was ever wasted
You are the sweetest I have ever tasted
We have spent so many years - why not a life?
Mary, will you marry me - and become my wife?
Mary, if you have received that and have recognized me, then give me a sign so that I can continue with the romantic part of my proposal…
————- SNIP (email text end) —————
November 13th, 2007 at 3:52 pm
I just found a blog that links to secret amazon.com web pages
Enter the Secret Amazon Web Pages:
http://bargains-hunter.blogspot.com/2007/10/how-to-find-bargains-at-amazons-secret.html
[url=http://bargains-hunter.blogspot.com/2007/10/how-to-find-bargains-at-amazons-secret.html]Bargains Hunter[/url]
This is where you’re going to find the “latest sales, rebates, and limited-time offers” from
Amazon, and you can score some pretty deep discounts if you’re a savvy shopper.
Next, there’s the special Sale link. This is open every Friday, and ONLY on Fridays.
You can find the same good discounts here as you would in hidden Deals, although some
Fridays you can really get lucky and make off like an Amazon bandit - I’ve seen discounts
there as low as 75% off sticker price.
November 15th, 2007 at 4:23 pm
Hi,
I just found the blog:
http://bargains-hunter.blogspot.com/2007/11/amazon-price-drop-more-than-44-and-i.html
There is an amazing how-to for changing the amazon price.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:29 am
Hi,
ever wondered how to get better Amazon deals or how to get that 30-day refund from Amazon?
We discovered a gret service which tracks prices for you and alerts youl.
Check out our latest review at:
http://bargains-hunter.blogspot.com/2007/12/apnoticom-review.html
February 1st, 2008 at 7:51 am
Thanks for sharing
March 24th, 2008 at 3:10 am
I’d prefer reading in my native language, because my knowledge of your languange is no so well.