Belarus Arrests Prominent Wikipedia Editor, Sentences Him to 15 Days of Arrest (theverge.com) 73
Friday the Verge reported:
The Main Directorate for Combating Organized Crime and Corruption of Belarus (GUBOPiK) has detained prominent Wikipedia editor Mark Bernstein, according to the Belarusian publication Zerkalo.
The arrest comes after Bernstein's personal information was shared on GOBUPiK's public Telegram channel. Bernstein is one of the top 50 editors of Russian Wikipedia. The Verge was able to confirm that Bernstein's information — including his social media, Wikipedia handle, and place of work — had been shared in GUBOPik's channel on the messaging app. A video of Bernstein's arrest was also posted alongside his photo and personal details. In the photo itself, Bernstein is accused of "distributing fake anti-Russian information." The channel has since been made private....
In an activity log of Bernstein's purported Wikimedia username, you can see that he's made over 200,000 edits to Russian Wikipedia articles. Currently, his account is described as "blocked indefinitely."
"Earlier in March, Slate reported on the same Wikipedia editor and his efforts to ensure the correct information hits pages about the invasion," adds The Byte.
On Saturday the human rights site Charter 97 reported that Bernstein was given 15 days of arrest, "according to the Viasna human rights center."
The arrest comes after Bernstein's personal information was shared on GOBUPiK's public Telegram channel. Bernstein is one of the top 50 editors of Russian Wikipedia. The Verge was able to confirm that Bernstein's information — including his social media, Wikipedia handle, and place of work — had been shared in GUBOPik's channel on the messaging app. A video of Bernstein's arrest was also posted alongside his photo and personal details. In the photo itself, Bernstein is accused of "distributing fake anti-Russian information." The channel has since been made private....
In an activity log of Bernstein's purported Wikimedia username, you can see that he's made over 200,000 edits to Russian Wikipedia articles. Currently, his account is described as "blocked indefinitely."
"Earlier in March, Slate reported on the same Wikipedia editor and his efforts to ensure the correct information hits pages about the invasion," adds The Byte.
On Saturday the human rights site Charter 97 reported that Bernstein was given 15 days of arrest, "according to the Viasna human rights center."
Re: (Score:2)
This is Belarus we're talking about. "Doxing" isn't something they even remotely care about.
Gestapo type surveillance and suppression is more their thing.
Re: (Score:2)
This is Belarus we're talking about. "Doxing" isn't something they even remotely care about.
Gestapo type surveillance and suppression is more their thing.
The Russian terrorists are already doing the same thing in Ukraine [twitter.com]. Further information on Oleg [twitter.com].
In Kherson, to try and prevent another fake election such as the one "held" in occupied Crimea, the people sent out a declaration that the city is forever part of Ukraine and has no interest in being part of Russia.
Re: (Score:2)
KGB style surveillance actually, since their state security has kept the old name even after 1991.
Re: Doxing is fine if it's your side that does it, (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Either doxing is an acceptable tactic in war, so it's fine if your side does it but you'll be suitably outraged if your enemies do it to your friends, or it's never fine.
Because private organizations cancelling high profile public performances by Russians (usually ones who support Putin) is totally the same as governments arresting people for reporting accurate information.
Re: (Score:2)
...how to get by without tagging everyone with a state-registered identity...
We should start by burning our birth certificates then.
Whose with me? Don't burn your driver's license though, you might need it.
Pls arrest the rest of them (Score:1)
Wikipedia's mods/admins/editors need to be purged for people who aren't blatantly biased.
This is not a pro-Russia comment, this is an anti-Wikipedia comment. Too many times I've seen blatant lies on that website under locked pages simply because some partisan journalist published an opinion piece bordering on libel
Re: (Score:3)
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Maybe millennials never learned what that means.
It tells you briefly what has been published on a subject, and where to find those publications.
It's not some arbiter of truth.
Re: (Score:2)
Wikipedia claims to strive to be neutral and factual [wikipedia.org]. Either they do or they don't in general, and either they do or they don't on certain topics. I find it to be extremely useful in general, but some articles are shitfests.
Re: (Score:2)
The link you provided does not support the idea that Wikipedia strives to be factual. Wikipedia strives to provide 'a neutrally written summary of existing mainstream knowledge in a fair and accurate manner with a straightforward, "just-the-facts style".'
Re: (Score:2)
The link you provided does not support the idea that Wikipedia strives to be factual. Wikipedia strives to provide 'a neutrally written summary of existing mainstream knowledge in a fair and accurate manner with a straightforward, "just-the-facts style".'
Whoops! You quoted the part you meant to leave out.
Re: (Score:2)
No, you failed to understand it.
Wikipedia's criteria is whether there are references for a claim rather than whether it is factual.
For example, if someone tries to say on Wikipedia "I am the world expert on this topic and this is what I say", that isn't acceptable, even if they are the world expert on the topic. What is acceptable is referencing something that has been written on the topic.
Re: (Score:2)
Then there's the "selective choosing" problem with regards to references, used to tilt articles. And when trans editors stand up to that, they get falsely accused of things so that they can be "disappeared" under false pretenses [wikipediasucks.co] (noting that by all accounts, the account was just fine prior to the false accusations, and then Beeblebrox / Guerillero / Boing Said Zebedee themselves masterminded the account harassing the victim, witness BSD admitting to having the password to and running the harassing account [wikipediocracy.com]).
Re: (Score:2)
I think the part where someone could claim they are trying to be "factual" is where they state they are a "summary of existing mainstream knowledge" (i.e. facts) not "existing mainstream opinions" or "existing mainstream writings" but "knowledge".
Re: (Score:2)
Wikipedia claims to strive to be neutral and factual [wikipedia.org]. Either they do or they don't in general, and either they do or they don't on certain topics. I find it to be extremely useful in general, but some articles are shitfests.
On the stuff I'm the expert in, it's clear they value a neutral viewpoint over being correct.
Re: Pls arrest the rest of them (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Do you have evidence that this occurs more frequently with Wikipedia than traditional encyclopedias, or are you publishing your own (mis?) perception?
I do kn
Re: (Score:2)
Do you have evidence that this occurs more frequently with Wikipedia than traditional encyclopedias
Traditional encyclopedias don't cover "hot" political topics. Mainly because they can't be updated quickly enough to do so. Especially true for partisan topics where each party flip flops to the complete opposite opinion very quickly.
Re: (Score:2)
Too many times I've seen blatant lies on that website under locked pages simply because some partisan journalist published an opinion piece bordering on libe
Provides zero examples of such.
That's not anti-your comment, that's just being anti-saying shit and not providing one lick of an example for anyone to study. The last four to six years has made me so over the taking anything in a comment section at face value, even if in my head I can literally think of an example. Do rely on your audience to have had a similar experience as you. Link in some wikipedia pages here or don't comment. Everyone is just going to have to stop "I've seen.." style comments becau
Re: (Score:1)
Here's a video where a woman talks about how her wikipedia page is basically baseless libel based on opinion, just as I said.
Re: (Score:2)
It's literally a video of someone who doesn't agree with what the vast majority of people agree on labeling her. That's hardly bias if a majority of people agree with that labeling and that labeling actually fits the person's agenda.
She goes into "legal" requirements that don't exist. Uses definition of words that are not the accepted definition of those words (eg: alt-right). And many more, of her personal takes on subjects that she clearly has no idea what she is speaking on. She's literally using her
Re: (Score:1)
Do you also believe that transgender people don't get to choose what they are, it's up to the general public?
Re: Pls arrest the rest of them (Score:2)
Conflating two wildly different things is not valid reasoning.
Re: (Score:2)
In what world is it sane for someone's haters to be given more power in deciding what someone's political leanings
You are getting the order of operations incorrect. There is a well understood meaning to alt-right. The majority of people agree to what that means. If a person's behaviors fit that definition, then it is apt to use that label to describe them. We are judged by actions not words. So no matter her "stated" political leanings, her actions speak about what is being written. She is free to claim her political leanings however she desires, but her actions are also judged by those who write about her. Any
Re: (Score:1)
It's some kind of stupid fucking self fulfilling prophesy where haters define the terms then apply them to anybody they want.
I'm 100% sure a large amount of people think Trudeau is a textbook fascist, so why can't I apply that label on his wikipedia page?
Re: (Score:2)
Only leftists (aka haters) are allowed to edit controversial pages, so frankly I don't know what the fuck you're talking about.
Reason. Which given this statement, it's clear that you wish to only engage in conspiracy. Oh and just in case: Using the second one here. [merriam-webster.com] Which I feel almost compelled that given how out of wack with the idea that "words have meaning" that is on-going in this thread. To conspire is vastly different than say Collaborate [merriam-webster.com] and if I have to actually spell out why that is or how they are different, then there's really no hope in anything you say making a lick of sense. But do understand, you are sitting th
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
So, we have this site which might promote falsehoods.
And you propose basically to jail the people that wrote those?
Where will we end?
Jailing adults that promote falsehoods on their Facebook profile?
Jailing kids that promote falsehoods on their math homework?
Re: (Score:1)
They want to control the narrative to align to their lies, but that's not actually the truth, that's misinformation.
Western privilege (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
George Orwell, 1984: “Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.” [goodreads.com]
Re: (Score:2)
We find this strange, because we live in the minority of the world where it is not a crime to disagree with the government.
While it is fair that this is outrageous, he most likely broke local law by disagreeing with his government and he will now pay the price for it.
I hope he will be free soon.
Belarus and Russia are both calling themselves democracies, even though they aren't - so it is certainly possible that it is formally legal to disagree with the government. You'll just mysteriously end up in jail on other charges. Or beaten up. Or both.
Will be interesting to see how long it takes before Russia does the Anschluss [wikipedia.org] of Belarus. Putin is already following Hitler's playbook in Ukraine, in the style of Sudetenland [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
"we live in the minority of the world where it is not a crime to disagree with the government" - I think this is considered a bug rather than a feature by our governments.
Re: (Score:2)
We find this strange, because we live in the minority of the world where it is not a crime to disagree with the government.
For now. There are far too many "educated" Gen Xers who want to repeal the First Amendment for me to be comfortable.
Re: (Score:2)
Somewhere around 1/3 of the nation wants to repeal the second, without the actual hard part of repealing it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> We find this strange, because we live in the minority of the world where it is not a crime to disagree with the government.
They have non-violent J6 protesters in solitary without trial for more than a year, including people who didn't go inside or incite rioters.
Also people who weren't there and didn't organize anything have been subpoenaed before the J6 committee because they were 'known associates' of politicians who spoke out against the maltreatment of political prisoners.
It's a Star Chamber, as mu
Re: (Score:2)
Just poison the well (Score:2)
What uis wikipedia? Really? (Score:1)
It is a hear-say site that does not use honest investigative journalists but only editors who rely on whatever sources they can reference. In today's world of increasing controlled media propaganda it is inherent that Wikipedia is more and more biased and to the point of libel. However, libel is what they avoid by placing the responsibility on the sources.
This is unlike social media such as Facebook, Twitter, and more which will ban you from posting such referencing material, including just links to it that
What are they doing with Snowden? (Score:2)
Might they demand some prisoner exchange? Or a two-for-one special to extradite such people from Russian residency?
Re: (Score:2)
Kind of ironic he ended up in the least free country in the world.
Re: (Score:2)
That would be North Korea. Russia is bad, but not as bad as that.
However if that were the greatest irony to come out of the Cheney/Bush years we would be doing pretty well.
Re: What are they doing with Snowden? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That would be the United States. For 2022: Top 10 Countries with the most people in prison
United States — 2,068,800
China — 1,690,000
Brazil — 811,707
India — 478,600
Russia — 471,490
Thailand — 309,282
Turkey — 291,198
Indonesia — 266,259
Mexico — 220,866
Iran — 189,000
Top 10 Countries with the highest rate of incarceration
United States — 629
Rwanda — 580
Turkmenistan —
Re: What are they doing with Snowden? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Given that the most pessimistic assessments of Assange were correct, and Snowden relied on Assange, it's not surprising.
Re: (Score:2)
Might they demand some prisoner exchange? Or a two-for-one special to extradite such people from Russian residency?
Snowden has no real value for Russia. I doubt he's working on anything really significant there as they don't really trust traitors that much. But he has huge propaganda value in that Putin and his cronies can use Snowden to argue the following.
1. The US is so corrupt that one of their own IT experts fled it in disgust to come to a much freer society - Russia.
2. Others who want to defect can find safety and sanctuary with us.
Snowden might be in trouble under a new regime after Putin that wan
Only 15 days? (Score:1)
Putie would set it to 15 years.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not hyperbole. They passed a 15-year-sentence last week.
Re: Only 15 days? (Score:2)
Welcome skilled immigrants and drain the enemy. (Score:5, Insightful)
The USA was built on immigrants fleeing the horrors of Eastern Europe (search "pogrom" if you're not familiar) long before Bolshevist victory. Canada and the US can use the talent and we've plenty of room for more like our ancestors.
The low-hanging fruit of truly European cultures is mostly part of NATO. Barbarian fringe worlds are best weakened by emigration o of their talent since they've no hope of escaping their own cultures. (Not all cultures interchange, this Finnish former Intel guy goes into fascinating detail re: Russianized culture which has never conceived of secular democracy or any democracy which is a purely European invention
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
The West captured enormous intellectual capital during Cold War v1.0 by welcoming compatible, educated (uneducated humans are not desirable like it or not, see Trump voters for why) immigrants. We should do the same today.
Want to peacefully decapitate enemy societies? Offer a warm welcome to the few good people socially imprisoned therein! That's how American industrial might was built before the US became stupidly xenophobic. There is plenty of talent able to thrive here and be immensely productive citizens.
Kindness is a deadly weapon against evil. There is no single solution but new, capable, motivated citizens eager for secular democracy (not just economic opportunities, we grow enough ignorants ourselves) are always an asset.
Re: Welcome skilled immigrants and drain the enemy (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
If he wants to write about things he can see on the ground in Belarus, it's better to be there than to emigrate to some echo chamber in some other country. But it's too bad that it results in this kind of persecution for such a thing as mere writing on Wikipedia. Let's hope that Lukashenko and Putin will not be in power for much longer, and the backlash after they're gone will loosen up the communications again.
As far as I can tell, he was arrested for violating that new Russian law making criticism of th
Re: (Score:2)
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries" --Churchill (b. 1874)
Why would Wikipedia block his account then? (Score:2)
I'm not sure I'm following what is going on here.
Why would Wikipedia would block his account?
They are not part of the Belarus regime.
So are the accusations true to such an extend that even the Wikipedia organization saw a need to indefinitely block his account?
Re: (Score:2)
It's a reasonably response for any potentially compromised account. It's not that Wikipedia doesn't trust this editor—it's that they can't be sure any future edits are actually from him following his arrest.
When he's once again free and clearly not under duress they can take steps to reactivate the account. I.e., after Ukraine wins this war and the former governments of Russia and Belarus are no longer a threat to anyone.
Compare his fate to (Score:2)