Comments:Wikinews interviews Sue Gardner on Wikipedia blackout

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. Please remain on topic and avoid offensive or inflammatory comments where possible. Try thought-provoking, insightful, or controversial. Civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Use the "Start a new discussion" button just below to start a new discussion. If the button isn't there, wait a few seconds and click this link: Refresh.

Start a new discussion


Thread titleRepliesLast modified
Comments from feedback form - "awesome!"021:35, 22 January 2012
Comments from feedback form - "So this article is not neutral..."605:18, 21 January 2012
Please list all the contact information for the house and senate phone numbers web addresses ((SUPPORTERS)) so on015:20, 20 January 2012
Wikipedia blackout309:01, 19 January 2012
Great job!020:19, 18 January 2012
Great interview113:35, 18 January 2012

Comments from feedback form - "awesome!"

awesome! (talk)21:35, 22 January 2012

Comments from feedback form - "So this article is not neutral..."

So this article is not neutral and I applaud that! Love that a company this big is take a stance. This article is not meant to be neutral, go Wikipedia!!! (talk)14:51, 18 January 2012

Wikinews is neutral in reporting: but we do have interviews where interviewees are allowed to say what they wish and express their opinions. We don't do Fox News style fake balance though.

Tom Morris (talk)14:59, 18 January 2012

Fox News often sets up a back and forth with two guests. The "information" presented on Wikipedia's website during the protest made no allowance for any rebuttal with respect to the claims of fact that were made. How about for your next interview calling up The Information Technology & Innovation Foundation and asking them about where their funding is coming from and what their view of the protest is.

Brian Dell (talk)10:48, 19 January 2012


Not, based on this page (, someone I'd trust to be "unbiased" about SOPA or PIPA.

Orrin Hatch is well-known to be so deep in the pockets of big media companies that he's covered in lint.

Brian McNeil / talk11:04, 19 January 2012

And Darrell Issa, who's also on the board, isn't the biggest anti-SOPA Congressman on the Hill? Even if they ARE biased, why so scared of hearing an opposing view? The ITIF people happen to know a lot about what's actually in these bills. Instead of interviewing Sue how about arranging a debate between her and someone who disagrees with her?

Brian Dell (talk)00:13, 21 January 2012

It's evident you suffer from a malady all too common in our modern world: you can't recognize neutrality even if you see it. Presumably this malady stems in part from rarely having the opportunity to see it; I prescribe hanging around Wikinews. A Wikinewsie learns to find and present a neutral view of the news, without bias from their own opinions. We all have opinions; the trick is to know where neutrality is, so one knows where one is relative to it.

Pi zero (talk)05:18, 21 January 2012

Of course the article is neutral. The interviewee isn't neutral, but that's got nothing to do with the neutrality of the article. Neutrality of news is inherently different from neutrality of an encyclopedic entry; see WN:NPOV.

Pi zero (talk)15:02, 18 January 2012

Please list all the contact information for the house and senate phone numbers web addresses ((SUPPORTERS)) so on

Wouldn't it be easy to list this information with article or post? (talk)15:20, 20 January 2012

Wikipedia blackout

Not all english speakers are US citizens. What do you gain by depriving the people of Britain, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and others of your service when they have no power to influence the legislation you object to. Englishman. (talk)14:38, 18 January 2012

With minor rewording (to remove the assertion of opinion at the end), that would have made a great question to ask in the interview. Coming up with good questions for an interview is really difficult.

Pi zero (talk)14:59, 18 January 2012

Disclaimer: I've created and painstakingly edited hundreds of high quality technical articles on WP. But it was quite a shock when in response to a routine WP inquiry, I was redirected to what appears to be a poorly designed and HIGHLY INTRUSIVE advertising page. Needless to say, not only had I not participated in "largest-ever community discussion on English Wikipedia" (pat yourself on the back 3 more times, Sue), I was utterly unaware of the action and have wasted quite a bit of time just trying to figure out what has happened. So the work of hundreds of thousands of people donated with the understanding that it would be freely available to everyone, all the time, has been hijacked by a small group of vocal users. (The ultimate irony: one cannot even review the discussion while the "blackout" is in place.) As usual, bureaucrats take over and corrupt a great volunteer project once it grows beyond a certain size and starts to make impact. What contribution to the content of Wikipedia have you made, Sue, and why are you so arrogant? (talk)02:39, 19 January 2012

The advert you're complaining about linked to easy instructions on disabling the blackout notice.

Brian McNeil / talk09:01, 19 January 2012

Great job!

Hey, Tom Morris. Just wanted to say you made a great job here. I'm a Brazilian Wikimedian and it's great to have this kind of first-hand information on an issue that has great impact, specially while it was given by Wikinews. Way to go!

CasteloBrancomsg20:15, 18 January 2012

Great interview

I'm glad to see this issue is being brought the attention it deserves. Thanks for the great interview Tom Morris!

Gopher65talk13:19, 18 January 2012


Tom Morris (talk)13:35, 18 January 2012