Editing Eurovision Wiki:Teahouse (section)

== Intellectual diversity ==

I think it would be a great idea to organize a WikiProject Intellectual Diversity, which supports very broad diversity in terms of ideology, religion, national/ethnic affinities, philosophy, intellectual (e.g., language-based, national academic) traditions, media culture, etc. But I think Wikipedia's policies have been gradually changed to be hostile to intellectual diversity in this sense, and many Wikipedians can be hostile as well, whether they mean to be or not. Without actually litigating the (admittedly highly interesting!) substantive question whether Wikipedia ''should support'' intellectual diversity, can you give me insight into how I might organize such a WikiProject without essentially painting a target on the back of participants? [[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] ([[User talk:Larry Sanger|talk]]) 16:13, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
:Hey @[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]]. Instructions on how to create a WikiProject are at [[WP:PROJGUIDE]]. I'm not knowledgeable on the functions of this kind of stuff, but I believe you will need to concoct a group of editors who are willing to collaborate and create this project with you. [[User:Tarlby|<span style="background-color:black;color:RoyalBlue;font-family:Comic Sans MS;">''toby''</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:Tarlby|''t'']])([[Special:Contributions/Tarlby|''c'']])([[Rain World|rw]])([[Omori (video game)|omo]])</sup> 16:21, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
::Yes, I can read basic instructions; I know all that. The question is much more specialized. [[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] ([[User talk:Larry Sanger|talk]]) 16:44, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
:::Could you clarify what you mean by not wanting to {{tq|essentially [paint] a target on the back of participants}}? [[User:Tarlby|<span style="background-color:black;color:RoyalBlue;font-family:Comic Sans MS;">''toby''</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:Tarlby|''t'']])([[Special:Contributions/Tarlby|''c'']])([[Rain World|rw]])([[Omori (video game)|omo]])</sup> 17:46, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
::::Sure, I will give it a try, although it’s a little tricky. In order to advocate for intellectual diversity, this would mean, among other things, pushing back hard on policies and decisions relating to “fringe theories,” NPOV, and RS. The problem is that these tend to be incendiary topics by their very nature, and partisans will often hunt for ammunition to use against the other side. If a partisan can point to a WikiProject membership that can be colored as showing bias, that “paints a target” for such editors. Worries along these lines might disincentivize people from joining such a WikiProject. Does this make sense? [[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] ([[User talk:Larry Sanger|talk]]) 18:02, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::I would assume that the best way to avoid such target painting and risk would be to make it clear that the WikiProject does not advocate for the breaking of any such policies. [[User:OmegaMantis|✨ΩmegaMantis✨]]<sup>(he/him) </sup> <small>  [[User talk:OmegaMantis|❦blather]] &#124; [[Special:Contributions/OmegaMantis|☞spy on me]]</small> 20:48, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::Except he explicitly advocates for the destruction of those policies, and has consistently for years [[User:mghackerlady|<span style="color: #C9A0DC ">mghackerlady</span>]] ([[User talk:Mghackerlady|talk]]) ([[Special:Contributions/mghackerlady|contribs]]) 21:26, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
:It feels a little silly for me to be giving any advice on Wikipedia procedure to its cofounder, but you asked; and welcome back, Larry. It's generally inappropriate to use WikiProjects as advocacy groups/voting blocs/pressure orgs in this way, since that sort of thing is a form of [[WP:CANVAS]]. and I don't see what else this WikiProject would be doing except, as you state, {{tq|'pushing back hard on policies and decisions.'}} [[WP:WikiProject]] tells us the main function of a WikiProject should be to {{tq|improve a particular topic area [by] develop[ing] ideas, discuss[ing] sources, maintain[ing] various collaborative processes, and keep[ing] track of work that needs to be done.}} If what you're doing is essentially trying to widen the scope of what Wikipedia considers acceptable sourcing, that seems like something best done/discussed by avenues like [[WP:WikiProject Reliability]] and the [[WP:Village pump (policy)]]. What I think you're likely to find, however, is that the general consensus of Wikipedia editors have no interest in broadening the scope of reliability to include what we currently consider to be fringe. The social values of Wikipedia in terms of its respect for academia and intellectualism are very well-entrenched, and I do not see any immediate future where people will be willing to accept the words of, for lack of better terms, cranks, quacks and conspiracy theorists as encyclopedic sources. [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 21:12, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
::Wanted to point out for this discussion the currently-inactive [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Alternative views|Alternative views WikiProject]]. <b style="font-family:Kristen ITC">[[User:WikiMacaroons|<span style="color:#ff3030">Wiki</span>]][[User:WikiMacaroons|<span style="color:#d6b41e">Macaroons</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:WikiMacaroons|<span style="color:#3447a3">Cinnamon?</span>]]</sup></b> 00:45, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
::@[[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]]  Well said! We certainly don't want to weaken NPOV, or RS.  Or even FRINGE. There can be "intellectual diversity" without being FRINGE. [[User:David10244|David10244]] ([[User talk:David10244|talk]]) 03:22, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
:::My last sentence meant, intellectual diversity is not achieved by weakening those policies.  Unless we want speculation and random opinions in articles, and if we don't, then weakening those policies is not the way to go.  @[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]], do you have any different way of expressing what you meant, or do you really want fringe theories and unreliable sources such as random blogs and YouTube videos to be used as sources for articles? Along with articles that "prove" that the earth is flat? [[User:David10244|David10244]] ([[User talk:David10244|talk]]) 03:37, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
::::You should read Sanger's nine theses (or at least his overview thereof) at [[User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses]] for the answer to this question. They include such items as {{tq|2. Enable competing articles}} and {{tq|3. Abolish source blacklists}}.
::::You can read it in the man's own words, but his stance really does seem to be that Wikipedia should be completely impartial as to determinations of what is 'true' or 'reliable' or even 'sensible', and that no viewpoint should be excluded from summary based on considerations such as [[WP:FRINGE]] or [[WP:UNDUE]]. [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 03:42, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::WP:FRINGE and WP:UNDUE need to be greatly weakened if not abolished. [[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] ([[User talk:Larry Sanger|talk]]) 13:41, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::I don't think you're going to get much support for dismantling basic policies & guidelines, especially when advocating for a wikiproject to promote fringe theories. [[User:Butterscotch Beluga|Butterscotch Beluga]] ([[User talk:Butterscotch Beluga|talk]]) 20:41, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::::These aren't "basic policies." They are a radical transformation of Wikipedia's original and most basic policy—turning NPOV on its head. [[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] ([[User talk:Larry Sanger|talk]]) 02:32, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::::Then Wikipedia becomes a Web-host and not an academic encyclopaedia. Fringe theories can be mentioned but only from a point of view to show they aren’t confirmed or an article on them if the fringe theory is large enough (take [[Moon landing conspiracy theories]] for example).  [[User:KeyolTranslater|The Grenadian Historian (Aka. Mwen Sé Kéyòl Translator-a)]] ([[User talk:KeyolTranslater|talk]]) 10:46, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::::The [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view&oldid=270461 version of NPOV you cited in your thesis] states that {{tq|not make an article state, imply, or insinuate that any one side is correct.}} The problem with this is there are facts. The Holocaust happened, men have landed on the moon, and vaccines don't cause autism. These are all facts that have been proven time and time again. We would be doing an active disservice to our readers by giving these false statements and fringe theories the same platform we give 100% proven correct facts. Our current version of NPOV reflects this reality, which is why we have made it the way it currently is. [[User:Mikeycdiamond|Mikeycdiamond]] ([[User talk:Mikeycdiamond|talk]]) 15:06, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::That is an absolutely terrible idea and question why you're even allowed back here [[User:mghackerlady|<span style="color: #C9A0DC ">mghackerlady</span>]] ([[User talk:Mghackerlady|talk]]) ([[Special:Contributions/mghackerlady|contribs]]) 21:15, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::::This is obviously abusive, and I will report you if you persist. [[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] ([[User talk:Larry Sanger|talk]]) 02:33, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::@[[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]]  I read the theses a while back, and I still don't see how it would help intellectual rigor and honesty, and indeed reality, to allow fringe theories here.  The earth is not flat.  @[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]], I understand your viewpoint,  but I disagree with it.  [[User:David10244|David10244]] ([[User talk:David10244|talk]]) 05:32, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::If you compare nine completely commonsensical reforms to flat earth theory, you aren't taking me seriously; and neither can I take you seriously. Over and out. [[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] ([[User talk:Larry Sanger|talk]]) 02:30, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::::@[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]]  Weakening Fringe, RS, and NPOV are not commonsensical.  My point was that weakening, for example, FRINGE and RS, could lead to articles saying that the earth is flat... referenced to fringe websites.  RS seeks to avoid that. [[User:David10244|David10244]] ([[User talk:David10244|talk]]) 05:47, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
:Given your history, a proposal like this should be met with a target on your back. You've consistently defamed us and made claims about supposed "bias" without evidence and seem to believe that all views should have the same weight instead of being judged by their sources reliability. I highly doubt this project of yours is being done altruistically, especially in todays political climate and the current targeting of wikipedia.
:Respectfully, get lost and have the day you deserve [[User:mghackerlady|<span style="color: #C9A0DC ">mghackerlady</span>]] ([[User talk:Mghackerlady|talk]]) ([[Special:Contributions/mghackerlady|contribs]]) 21:13, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
::@[[User:Mghackerlady|Mghackerlady]], I don't understand why you would want to say this other than to hurt someone's feelings. Until Larry says he's some Wikipedia villain, we should consider his ideas and proposals like any other editor with respect. Ironically, you're proving his point: {{tq|But I think Wikipedia's policies have been gradually changed to be hostile to intellectual diversity in this sense, and many Wikipedians can be hostile}}. [[User:Tarlby|<span style="background-color:black;color:RoyalBlue;font-family:Comic Sans MS;">''toby''</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:Tarlby|''t'']])([[Special:Contributions/Tarlby|''c'']])([[Rain World|rw]])([[Omori (video game)|omo]])</sup> 21:24, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
:::Do you know who larry is? He doesn't get to subvert consensus because he's a cofounder, if anything his ideas should be treated with more harshness since he should know better and know they aren't going to do anything other than stir up drama [[User:mghackerlady|<span style="color: #C9A0DC ">mghackerlady</span>]] ([[User talk:Mghackerlady|talk]]) ([[Special:Contributions/mghackerlady|contribs]]) 21:29, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
::::Telling him to "get lost" does not do anything to address problems with his ideas. That being said, I agree that at some level we should be suspicious of Larry's aims in this current political climate -- his request reads like a trial balloon for an endeavor to circumvent policy. [[User:OmegaMantis|✨ΩmegaMantis✨]]<sup>(he/him) </sup> <small>  [[User talk:OmegaMantis|❦blather]] &#124; [[Special:Contributions/OmegaMantis|☞spy on me]]</small> 21:36, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::I admit my choice of wording was heated but and only inflames things but hugboxing him will only make him worse. I apologize for taking the Torvalds approach [[User:mghackerlady|<span style="color: #C9A0DC ">mghackerlady</span>]] ([[User talk:Mghackerlady|talk]]) ([[Special:Contributions/mghackerlady|contribs]]) 03:52, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
::::I did not say he should subvert consensus because he's a cofounder. Read what I said! We're not achieving anything by telling him to get lost. [[User:Tarlby|<span style="background-color:black;color:RoyalBlue;font-family:Comic Sans MS;">''toby''</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:Tarlby|''t'']])([[Special:Contributions/Tarlby|''c'']])([[Rain World|rw]])([[Omori (video game)|omo]])</sup> 22:13, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::That's correct; that does not achieve anything. But the fact is that a ''lot'' of people agree with me. Many of them are still active on this site. Many more were driven off the site, or never tried to edit.
:::::The very fact that the co-founder is here saying there are significant problems with the current set of policies, and that many people agree with me, suggests that this is an imposed and temporary decision, not a consensus. Indeed, one of the serious problems with the current constitution of Wikipedia is the fantasy that imposed decisions represent a "consensus." A consensus was always supposed to be a position that everybody could agree to because it represents an inclusive statement that takes into account the views of many. That is simply not how consensus works now.
:::::Anyway, I would still welcome advice on how to start up a new WikiProject Intellectual Diversity. [[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] ([[User talk:Larry Sanger|talk]]) 02:39, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::As I have said above, setting up a WikiProject for the express purpose of being a pressure org advocating for the repeal/modification of certain policies isn't going to work out; that's a form of [[WP:CANVAS]]sing. [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 03:23, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::Or maybe instead of imagining a grand conspiracy of silent editors pushed off the site over a forced consensus you can maybe take a hint that the pushback is because we get enough of this crap already, with 99% of it being in bad faith. If you don't like the policies we have, get lost. Seriously. We're under a free license, fork us and make your own. See how well that went for the other dozen people who've tried [[User:mghackerlady|<span style="color: #C9A0DC ">mghackerlady</span>]] ([[User talk:Mghackerlady|talk]]) ([[Special:Contributions/mghackerlady|contribs]]) 03:49, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::::<small>[[Citizendium|he already did that...]]</small> [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 03:51, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::::Well then, larry, move on. You can't have your cake and eat it too. The unpopularity of your project only reinforces that our policies make a better running and more accurate encyclopedia [[User:mghackerlady|<span style="color: #C9A0DC ">mghackerlady</span>]] ([[User talk:Mghackerlady|talk]]) ([[Special:Contributions/mghackerlady|contribs]]) 03:55, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::::::May I ask what turned Larry against Wikipedia, and for his radical theses? In my opinion you can never truly be neutral and take in the ideas of all sides, because frankly, some of those ideas are stupid. Wikipedia can’t just met fringe whack theories be allowed to have articles which portray them as true, then we just become a intellectual battle ground and web-host which is not to be trusted.  [[User:KeyolTranslater|The Grenadian Historian (Aka. Mwen Sé Kéyòl Translator-a)]] ([[User talk:KeyolTranslater|talk]]) 10:56, 18 March 2026 (UTC)