1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Wikipedia blackout on January 18

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by EStreetJoe, Jan 17, 2012.

  1. Mystery Meat II

    Mystery Meat II Well-Known Member

    m.wikipedia.org works just fine

    EDIT: except you can't search for a topic and hit enter, or it'll take you to regular blacked-out wikipedia. instead, you have to type in the phrase, let wikipedia give you a pull down menu of topic options, then click on the one you want.

    or you can just wait 10 hours for them to lift the blackout
     
  2. jr/shotglass

    jr/shotglass Well-Known Member

    Like I said, I wouldn't use it as source material. But I do think we go overboard sometimes about the inaccuracy of Wikipedia. Not only is most material accurate, if it's been dicked around with, it's pretty easy to see that it has been.

    No need for anyone to show me examples of the opposite. I know they're out there. I'm just saying that when I chase something down, it's proved to be relatively reliable.
     
  3. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    I miss the Sport Journalist.com entry on Wikipedia.

    It caused a bit of a stir around these parts when both sites were still in their infancy.
     
  4. Versatile

    Versatile Active Member

    I use Wikipedia while copy-editing constantly. I would never change something in a story based on Wikipedia, but it provides a great deal of background information and often points to incorrect things in a story. I was copy-editing a story that included Coach New Gun was coached by Coaching Legend from 19XX-XX at State U. I went to Wikipedia and found that Coaching Legend left State U after Coach New Gun's sophomore year. I verified with the State U website.

    The process was so much easier because of Wikipedia.

    On a related note, thanks to whoever brought up that you can hit the "stop" button on your browser before the blackout and still use Wikipedia. I work tonight. :)
     
  5. jackfinarelli

    jackfinarelli Well-Known Member


    Talk about unusual allies and opponents...
     
  6. NickMordo

    NickMordo Active Member

    What Google would look like if SOPA passed:

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2014
  7. Stitch

    Stitch Active Member

    Sites that aren't blacked out completely, like Wikipedia, serve as a reminder that there are always workaround to attempts to censor info. Look at China. I have Facebook friends comparing SOPA to the Great Chinese Firewall, but evading the firewall is prevalent. The authorities just don't want the unwashed masses to have unrestricted Internet access, same as here.
     
  8. Matt Stephens

    Matt Stephens Well-Known Member

    Still up today. I love it.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2014
  9. Matt Stephens

    Matt Stephens Well-Known Member

    Funny, I do get one Wiki page to work, the one about SOPA.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sopa
     
  10. doodah

    doodah Guest

    That's not a coincidence. Wikipedia did that on purpose.
     
  11. Matt Stephens

    Matt Stephens Well-Known Member

    I know and understand why. Just find it amusing, is all.
     
  12. JRoyal

    JRoyal Well-Known Member

    There are still hearings scheduled for SOPA in the House and PIPA in the Senate. The fear is that the bills may be amended in some way that makes them politically palatable but still would be bad for the Internet. They need to be scrapped totally and started over.


    Just tried and I still got the blackout. And it was never "global," just for the English wikipedia. However, they left it where you can get to it still on mobile devices and by turning off Java. They wanted to make a point but still maintain a way for people to have access.

    The idea wasn't to make anyone suffer. It was to raise awareness of the issue. And I think they did that incredibly effectively. But take wikipedia away for good, take youtube away for good, sure, people can live without them. But they've shown they have an impact on society and can make people's lives much easier or at least bring a little pleasure.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page