Steem on Wikipedia? What's Up With The Current Page?! Obvious Bias!

in steem •  6 years ago 

I don't expect much from Wikipedia as I know how highly dodgy their editing process is - but the current page for Steem/Steemit is amazingly poor... What's going on?

4qEixipsxSf1sU6hijriHZUjqTiUF92ty6DeQgnsj1LV1wWLFgrgj71CDoaTf5f54z.jpg

All this talk of improving marketing for Steem has had me looking at the absolute basics of SEO and placement for Steem. What's one of the first places that people look to research a subject online? Wikipedia? Probably. Unfortunately, the current wikipedia page for Steem and Steemit contains literally nothing positive! The page pretty much only contains references to a long since passed hack event and absolute basics about the system. The clue here is that somehow, magically, they managed to include the update that Steemit inc. laid off 70% of it's staff! Hmm...

Why would the page about Steem contain almost nothing of any use, as if it just weren't being updated, but somehow manage to include all the negative press possible? Could there be 'bias' at Wikipedia? Nooo.. Surely not!

I remember when I tested bias at Wikipedia years ago. I found that the page for 'world peace' basically said 'World peace is a nice idea, but it's impossible' (paraphrasing). Since this is clearly and logically incorrect, I just made an edit which highlighted that world peace is entirely possible, provided the called for changes are made within human thinking and feeling. There was really nothing controversial in what I wrote (to most people's thinking) - yet my change was swiftly rejected and reversed. I also created a well written page for a spiritual teacher which was also rejected and in the discussion it was made clear to me that the editors were playing with me maliciously. So much for free thought and respect!

Steem on Wikipedia


So if we look through the talk page for Steem on Wikipedia, we can see that numerous edits have been suggested, including some detailed ones and a comment by notable Steemian @cryptoctopus

Despite all this content, the actual public page remains totally empty of any relevant info.

The page was even marked for total deletion from wikipedia and was apparently only saved at the last moment.

I'm not sure what the best solution is here, but if anyone here has experience of writing pages that get accepted for wikipedia then lets' discuss options for getting a more fair and interesting page about Steem up there.

Wishing you well,
Ura Soul


I am currently among the top 100 in the Steem User Authority Table

Vote @ura-soul for Steem Witness!


vote ura-soul for witness

View My Witness Application Here


(Witnesses are the computer servers that run the Steem Blockchain.
Without witnesses there is no Steem, Steemit, DTube, Utopian or
Busy... You can really help Steem by making your 30 witness votes count!)


steem ocean - diving deep into the blockchain

Find out your voter rank position at steemocean.com!


tribesteemup-orange-banner.png


ureka.org

I run a social network too!

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

I'm not sure what the best solution is here, but if anyone here has experience of writing pages that get accepted for wikipedia then lets' discuss options for getting a more fair and interesting page about Steem up there.

Generally few of us going there and entering neutral information is the best thing. Also the discussions should happen in the wikipedia talks as opposed to here. If more people participate in the talks and edits it will be good - but strictly it should not be biased. Lets say, we should not end up having a statement which says Steem is better than Etherium or vice-versa.

I have been contributing - mostly via photos. For some articles the photos I have submitted have stayed relevant for many years. But I was neutral and just uploaded the photos on unique aspects. Though there was once a case where I uploaded the photo of a flower and I mentioned its name. Apparently the flower had different names and there was a huge discussion about what is the correct name. The point is, silly things like name of a flower in different regions can become wars over there.

Yes, I appreciate that neutrality is needed - however, it appears that non neutrality among individuals seeking to erase certain blockchains from the mass consciousness - is causing the problem here. It would be good for us to work together to produce good content for the Steem pages and to publicise the result if Wikipedia acts in a biased way.

This post has been included in the latest edition of SoS Daily News - a digest of all you need to know about the State of Steem.



When Wikipedia constantly asks me for donations, but then I remember all the times I attempted to edit pages I know contain false or biased information and instantly I get messages saying they blocked my IP for attempting to do so.

I read on Steem a while ago that there is a blockchain online encyclopedia. I forget what it's called.

Ah yes, steem has a page on everpedia - maybe one day it will take over, but for now the mass consciousness tunes in to wikipedia.

Hi! Very nice thought of yours! I may be able to do some changes, could we talk on discord tomorrow?

Sure, I am a bit ill with flu at the moment, so it will have to be later in the day, GMT time - to let my body settle. I'm passed the worst of it though, thankfully.

Oh, I hope you will get better soon!
Whenever you feel better just let me know

Wikipedia is trash it’s sad that lots of people use it. There are so many cases of them doing exactly what you said, with the utmost bias and lack of objectivity. They also, in the same mindset of lame stream media, just push fear porn. It’s about the clicks more than anything. Can’t be accurate now can you!?

Posted using Partiko iOS

  ·  6 years ago (edited)

Wikipedia is wall to wall bullshit to the extent that it's almost a compliment to be negatively reviewed by them - for nutrition and conspiracy info I check them to see what the current line in zionist propaganda is...

Hell, given what's going on with Steemit at the moment that review wasn't even that bad! (and that is not a good thing)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steemit

Now check out the rave review for one of the biggest propaganda sites in the field of health and nutrition - a lying clueless pile of scum droppings named quackwatch gets god status:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quackwatch

wikpedia may well be even worse

Yes Quackwatch makes me feel ill, often!
It would be good to carefully map out the rules of wikipedia and put forward a cast iron page for Steem/Steemit and then record the outcome. Light needs to be shone there.

Hi @ura-soul!

Your post was upvoted by @steem-ua, new Steem dApp, using UserAuthority for algorithmic post curation!
Your UA account score is currently 6.903 which ranks you at #96 across all Steem accounts.
Your rank has improved 3 places in the last three days (old rank 99).

In our last Algorithmic Curation Round, consisting of 163 contributions, your post is ranked at #111.

Evaluation of your UA score:
  • You've built up a nice network.
  • The readers appreciate your great work!
  • Try to work on user engagement: the more people that interact with you via the comments, the higher your UA score!

Feel free to join our @steem-ua Discord server