
Wikipedia Co-Founder Refuses to Comply With China's Censorship - Libertatea
http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2013/08/09/wikipedia-co-founder-refuses-to-comply-with-chinas-censorhip/
======
mjn
A quibble about implied agency:

Although Wales serves as a sort of public face of Wikipedia and has some
persuasive authority, the headline implies (the article less so) that he's
running the show, i.e. in a position where he could "agree" or "refuse" to
comply with censorship on behalf of Wikipedia. He used to make those kinds of
decisions, but has long since turned over control to a more stable, less
benevolent-dictator-for-life kind of setup. Nowadays policy is ultimately set
by the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees (where he's one of ten
trustees), and day-to-day decisions would be up to the Wikimedia staff, in
consultation with people on wikis and the mailing lists, overseen by executive
director Sue Gardner.

In any case, I do think he is accurately conveying the general sentiment held
by all those parties, so the substance of the article is right. But I think
the current setup actually makes that view even stronger, because even if
Wales somehow changed his mind and argued for censorship being the least-bad
option, he would probably have a hard time pushing that through; hence
Wikipedia's position doesn't depend on any one person.

~~~
ronaldx
I was going to say I've never seen him identified as "co-founder" in a
headline rather than just "founder".

~~~
Bjoern
Co-Founder.

Wikipedia was formally launched on 15 January 2001 by Jimmy Wales and Larry
Sanger, using the concept and technology of a wiki pioneered in 1995 by Ward
Cunningham.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Wikipedia)

~~~
redthrowaway
And, as with anything that involves Wikipedia, this is disputed. Jimbo hired
Sanger to work on Nupedia before Wikipedia began. Wikipedia was later launched
by that team. Sanger claims he co-founded it, while Jimbo claims he was an
employee and not a founder.

[http://www.nbcnews.com/id/17798723/#.Uggmx5LrxYw](http://www.nbcnews.com/id/17798723/#.Uggmx5LrxYw)

~~~
Bjoern
Probably the real question is, after leaving a project can you be downgraded
to nothing from Co-Founder?

Here is Sangers collection of "evidence".

[http://blog.larrysanger.org/role-in-wikipedia/my-role-in-
wik...](http://blog.larrysanger.org/role-in-wikipedia/my-role-in-wikipedia-
links/)

I find this paragraph most interesting.

Wikipedia’s first three press releases (2002, 2003, and 2004), including two
that I had nothing to do with, all credited me as founder. It was not until
later, in 2004 that Jimmy Wales began omitting mention of my involvement at
the start of Wikipedia to the press, and he didn’t start denying that I am co-
founder until 2005 or 2006, just when Wikipedia began to enter the public eye.

------
NelsonMinar
There are a couple of Chinese-native products like Wikipedia: Hudong and Baidu
Baike, at least. They both have more articles than English Wikipedia, although
I have no idea about their quality. And unlike Wikipedia they are for-profit
companies. Anyone know of a good article that compares them in depth?

In the US we tend to look at the parallel Chinese Internet largely as a
political question, censorship. But a primary reason China encourages
homegrown products is simple economics. China isn't content to be a US
economic colony, they build their own successful businesses.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Wikipedia#Competitors](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Wikipedia#Competitors)

~~~
jimworm
Anecdotal evidence: most articles I find on Baidu Baike are copied straight
out of Wikipedia, but many articles on Chinese topics have extra information
added.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
The articles are also harmonized where necessary.

~~~
voltagex_
Now there's an idea for a browser extension - given a Wikipedia page, find the
matching page and provide a "harmonization diff".

------
drunkenmasta
I guess that, unlike Google, there is not $$$$$$$ at stake in refusing to
comply.

~~~
alan_cx
More so that non Chinese people can act against China with out risk of arrest,
extradition or rendition. China is an easy target.

It is very easy to take a stand against China, and get props for it, when what
one is doing is risk free and frankly irrelevant. I cant see the Chinese
government crying at night that they cant get wikipedia. I cant see the
Chinese rising in revolt because they cant easily get wikipedia. There is no
consequence for Wales and co.

I say big deal. Try being Snowden. Try publishing information that breaks US
law. Try circumventing US internet security.

Frankly Im tired of China being a whipping boy for westerners who want to show
how right on and freedom loving they are they are. It is as useless as signing
an online petition.

Don't get me wrong, think wikipedia is one of the best resources on the
internet, I use the site a hell of a lot. I would like the Chinese people to
have access to it. I fully appreciated the stand against SOPA. I very much
respect the guys who set wikipedia up and all the contributors to it. But
really, this "stand" amounts to not a lot, except some easy publicity.

Oh, and he has complied with censorship. He had a choice: censor, or withdraw
everything. Both from a Chinese POV, both achieve the exact same thing. The
info they don't want their people accessing is not officially available. The
Chinese people still lose out.

Lastly, I understand that the Chinese people can get round the firewall in
various ways and still get wikipedia in full, and that people out side China
help greatly in that. Now, imagine that this was the US we were talking about.
Imagine that some one helped Americans get information the US government
didn't want Americans to see. Can we speculate on how far the American
government might go to stop it and deal with the people involved?

China is an easy, risk free target.

Yeah yeah, I know I know. China "evil", m'kay? So, fine to abuse their laws
and customs. But just one thing, its hardly going to speed them up in to the
arms of the oh so free west. Attacking them just makes them more defensive,
and it slows up their journey towards us.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
Wikipedia works just fine, it's not blocked by the GFW, even the Chinese
version. Wikemedia is blocked on some networks (like CMCC), so you might not
get images, and of course, some pages are blocked. Https may or may not be
blocked depending in the ISP, and if it isn't blocked you can access any page
you want.

China is 100 times worse than the USA on freedom and censorship, whatever you
guys are complaining about over there, don't get the wrong impression that it
is even close to what we get here. I'm neither for attacking or appeasing
china on censorship. Frankly, there is enough internal pressure that change is
inevitable, they'll deal.

~~~
jedbrown
> Wikipedia works just fine, it's not blocked by the GFW

This is not true. It varies on time and place, but it is usually blocked in at
least some regions. It's currently blocked [1] in Beijing and Inner Mongolia.
It was blocked when I was in Jilin Province two weeks ago. During that visit,
it was hit-or-miss whether my Digital Ocean mail server was reachable.

[1]
[http://www.greatfirewallofchina.org/index.php?siteurl=zh.wik...](http://www.greatfirewallofchina.org/index.php?siteurl=zh.wikipedia.org)
(same for en.wikipedia.org)

~~~
seanmcdirmid
It is not blocked fully in Beijing by any ISP I use. I'm using it right now in
bed and VPN is completely disabled.

The other link you gave me is blocked, though. So is Wikipedia https.
Zh.wikipedia is blocked also (not any other Lang though). Zh does work on my
phone though (china Unicom).

It's complicated, even beijing doesn't have a single GFW.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
I just checked on CMCC. zh.wikipedia.com works well enough, with the caveat
that https and wikimedia are blocked (so no secure page access, and no
pictures). At home, which I think is China Telecom, zh is blocked, but not
wikimedia (so I can see pictures).

------
teeja
Wikipedia didn't have to be so reasonable and visionary as it is.

 _... participation in the creation of 'the human story' is a right that can’t
be dictated by authorities._

I'm happy to give Mr. Wales credit due for consistently leading WP in that
direction. It is certainly one of the prime examples of the web's potential
for collaborative synergy and self-education. It's a moving success.

------
dogfoodheaven
Great to see Jimmy supporting human rights although the education support from
having a slightly limited wikipedia surely is something to consider

