Talk:Abstract Wikipedia

motivation

Wikipedia’s efforts to get its 300 language versions on the same page | The World from PRX alludes to Croatian Wikipedia#Controversy about right-wing bias; if we can get a more explicit source, this may be good to put in a background section. Arlo James Barnes 19:53, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@Arlo Barnes ~2026-33160-42 (talk) 19:44, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

You rang thrice? Taking the opportunity to put this here, albeit not an RS: blog post Arlo James Barnes 01:39, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

This might be a better source: MIT@20 book. --denny vrandečić (talk) 17:43, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

@Arlo Barnes Could this Slate article do the trick?

There have been a few examples of Wikipedia language editions with fewer volunteer editors having famously gone off-the-rails, such as the “legendarily bad” Scots Wikipedia or the far-right historical revisionism of Croatian Wikipedia. Perhaps leveraging Abstract Wikipedia as a standard starting place for those editions could help bring some factual rigor to those projects, stopping bad actors whose political goal is to minimize the horrors of the Holocaust.

Antibabelic (talk) 18:46, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Asking for pointer

Hi all! The article says "Nevertheless, the project has proved controversial." -- I would love to be pointed to those controversies, and make sure to see them. Could someone point me to them? --denny vrandečić (talk) 19:14, 15 April 2024 (UTC)