Lot of knee jerk reaction here, to the point of not donating and abandoning the greatest collective effort made on the Internet.
The specific suspended page directly relates to an ongoing lawsuit, where WikiMedia is the defendant.
Also, Streisand effect much? :D
I think this is confusing so tried to understand it and here is what I understand. The Wikipedia page for Asian News International is up. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_News_International And it says things like ANI is the "mouthpiece" of the Indian government. There is a section about the lawsuit and it quotes what ANI didn't like about it. This is what the lawsuit was first about, but this page and the discussion page are still up as of 27 Oct 2024. The page can't be modified and given what you can see it looks like there was some editing wars that happened before editing was taken away.
Now about https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_News_International_vs._Wikimedia_Foundation The article and discussion page that was taken down is about the ongoing lawsuit. It been replaced with a page saying it was taken down and a link to the actual lawsuit. Which I suggest people read. I do think the Indian government has a point if you read the lawsuit. This is a ongoing lawsuit and the page taken down had info on it and a discussion page where people were talking about the ongoing lawsuit. The lawsuit says that this "...Complicates and compounds the issue at hand." And if you know anything about lawsuits the first thing people do or are told to do is to shut up about it. This page was really the opposite. I can see why Wikimedia complied.
That the lawsuit happened in the first place is disturbing. But I think Wikimedia replacement page for the ongoing lawsuit is not surprising and reasonable. If they had taken down the main article, now that would be disturbing.
I do think the Indian government has a point if you read the lawsuit. This is a ongoing lawsuit and the page taken down had info on it and a discussion page where people were talking about the ongoing lawsuit. The lawsuit says that this "...Complicates and compounds the issue at hand."
Hard disagree. Ongoing lawsuits often have complicated issues, but are nonetheless topics of public concern. It's sometimes inconvenient for governments and large corporations to have the public aware of the lawsuit and the underlying facts and issues, but that's no reason to impose a gag order.
Frankly, whenever I hear a court give vague rationales like "complicates the issues," I assume they judge just doesn't like the criticism. That's what it sounds like here.
It is a public concern and any organization/people not a part of the lawsuit can talk and discuss it. Which we are doing. I even used the Wikipedia page we are talking about to discuss the lawsuit since it has the Order is on it. The full lawsuit isn't on that page, I made a mistake last night.
If there is a ongoing lawsuit that Wikimedia isn't a part of then they can have a Wikipedia page and discussion going on. That's their right.
My agreement is with the request in the Order for Wikimedia to not having ongoing discussion about the lawsuit. This isn't a gag order on everyone, it is just Wikimedia removing the info on the page about the lawsuit. And Wikimedia has info why they removed it and allowing people to read the Order so I think that is Wikimedia saying something without discussing it and it makes the Indian government look bad.
The order mentions more than "complicates the issue" so you might want to read the Order and gives more examples of what you see of their vagueness because it seemed reasonable to me. I find the lawsuit itself wrong and should have been thrown out.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_News_International_vs._Wikimedia_Foundation
wtf??????????
Why would they even bother to comply, India has no jurisdiction. Plenty of countries have banned wikipedia pages and the entire site before, why did wikimedia have to go out of their way to do it for them globally?
The current Indian government has prosecuted or detained employees of foreign companies in the past for actions taken by the company. There is a real risk here.
can't ban pages anymore with https, and while they don't want to be lumped in with the authoritarian states that ban all on Wikipedia, they are like them at heart
Right! It’s so suspicious they did it worldwide.
Fuck the Indian state and its enablers.
Yeah. India is pretty much a piece of shit country. Their government seems really corrupt and they pollute like mad while they still have so much of their busted caste system in place. All while being racist as hell.
they still have so much of their busted caste system in place
That really depends on the region, and it's more a cultural thing than an actual construct. A large chunk of the country doesn't meaningfully follow the caste system.
Source: Indian colleagues from various parts of the country.
Ask them how they feel about marrying someone outside of their caste.
I have. In some areas, they still practice arranged marriages, whereas in others, it works a lot more like in western countries.
India is a big, diverse country, and almost all of it has gone through substantial changes in the last few decades WRT social structure. The caste system has gone from "basically universal" to "a strong influence in decisions" to "barely recognizable in significant parts of the country." Yes, it still exists in some form in many areas, but it also is effectively dead in many others.
Me, viewing banned Wikipedia articles:
I don't know what exactly is blocked worldwde, but in the frenche Wikipedia here, while the description is short, it's here and extremely explicit:
[ANI] est pointée comme une « fabrique de fake news », un canal de désinformation proche du gouvernement indien4, dont les articles citent pour décrédibiliser les rivaux du pays de prétendus experts inventés de toutes pièces in other words, '{the ANI news agency] is considered a fake news factory and a deinformation channel close to the government whose papers use to quote invented fake experts to de-credibilize rival countries' Couldn't be clearer (and unbanned)...
This is the blocked article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_News_International_vs._Wikimedia_Foundation (https://archive.is/ZmGGk)
Here's an archived version of it before getting blocked: https://archive.is/dNTEl
from that page i can switch to English ☞ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_News_International
In July 2024, ANI filed a lawsuit against Wikimedia Foundation in the Delhi High Court — claiming to have been defamed in its article on Wikipedia — and sought ₹2 crore (US$240,000) in damages. At the time of the suit's filing, the Wikipedia article about ANI said the news agency had "been accused of having served as a propaganda tool for the incumbent central government, distributing materials from a vast network of fake news websites, and misreporting events on multiple occasions". The filing accused Wikipedia of publishing "false and defamatory content with the malicious intent of tarnishing the news agency's reputation, and aimed to discredit its goodwill".
On 5 September, the Court threatened to hold Wikimedia guilty of contempt for failing to disclose information about the editors who had made changes to the article and warned that Wikipedia might be blocked in India upon further non-compliance. The judge on the case stated "If you don't like India, please don't work in India... We will ask government to block your site". In response, Wikimedia emphasized that the information in the article was supported by multiple reliable secondary sources. Justice Manmohan said "I think nothing can be worse for a news agency than to be called a puppet of an intelligence agency, stooge of the government. If that is true, the credibility goes."
On 21 October, the Wikimedia Foundation suspended access to the article for Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation due to an order from the court.
which is what's quoted by OP
Blocking an article worldwide based on the orders of a single oppressive regime? That settles it, Wikipedia is no longer worth donating to, since they've proven they're willing to bow to this type of thing rather than stand behind the truth.
What's been blocked? Looks like just the ANI vs Wikipedia, but I don't think that's abnormal for an ongoing lawsuit. The ANI page is still up
Article is still up, I dont really understand this post.
Uh... No it isn't? Like, my dude, did you click the link up there?
The article on the lawsuit is blocked, which is standard procedure for participants of an ongoing lawsuit: Talk to your lawyer about it, and nobody else, because anything you say without your lawyer's counsel might jeopardise your legal position. Even if it's just people editing that article, the foundation will want to protect itself until the matter is settled.
Don't forget that non-profits, too, are beholden to laws. If they want to continue offering their services in India, they don't really want to be charged for contempt on top of the other case.
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
