This post is locked. You won't be able to comment.

all 5 comments

[–][deleted] [score hidden] stickied comment (0 children)

The Wiki summary says:

Nolan Investigates or Nolan Investigates: Stonewall is an investigative journalism podcast, released all at once on 13 Oct 2021, looking into the BBC's relationship with the lobby group charity, Stonewall.

OP, can you please send a message to all of us mods about what you're presenting here? To be completely frank and honest, I'm not going to read through the ramblings of Wikipedia users on a messy "talk" page just to figure out what you're trying to share with us or if it's relevant for LGB.

Please send us a message and clarify what your purpose is: https://saidit.net/message/compose?to=/s/LGBDropTheT

[–]RedEyedWarriorGay | Male | 🇮🇪 Irish 🇮🇪 | Antineoliberal | Cocks are Compulsory 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Wikipedia are an untrustworthy side.

I donated €2 to the site’s owners, Wikimedia Foundation, back in 2017. My reasoning was just to help reduce their dependence on bribes form Soros, the Clintons and the World Economic Forum. Turns out that didn’t matter in the end. Wikipedia still went even more batshit insane. Now I get emails from Wikimedia Foundation, begging me to donate to “keep Wikipedia free from bias”. No, Wikipedia is not free from bias. I get a sadistic pleasure knowing that they are begging me for money I have no intention of giving them. Fuck that neoliberal propaganda site. Hopefully there are alternatives.

[–]filbs111 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

https://encyclosphere.org is interesting.

[–]RedEyedWarriorGay | Male | 🇮🇪 Irish 🇮🇪 | Antineoliberal | Cocks are Compulsory 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I’ll give it a try. Cheers.

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi. 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's still here, not that anyone will navigate to this easily.

Looks like there might be a way to speed up the review a bit ("Improving your odds of a speedy review") though I've not had to do that before. I have very rarely contributed to Wikipedia, but it might be worth a shot just to say you tried everything. I'm not well-versed in assessing whether an editor is really following the correct guidelines when doing something like this, but you really did do a nice job, in my opinion as a general reader.

Current status: https://archive.ph/YOpR2

Revision history: https://archive.ph/T2jGy

Talk: https://archive.ph/Odyun

Sounds like you have a good convo going there about "fixing" it. If it were me, I'd play along and see what happens. If it's really censorship, the more you try to conscientiously cooperate, the worse it looks if they don't give you a path back to it being published.

In other words, for historical reasons, it’s worth documenting how they proceed with you, no matter what road they choose to keep going down.