top | item 41955552

(no title)

ToxicMegacolon | 1 year ago

> if the appeal is not successful and ANI wins, I think Wikipedia should just block India completely.

Let me see if I understand this correctly. It seems below is the sequence of events you are advocating for:

1. Wikipedia is allowed to legally represent themselves in the court of law. 2. Court looks at the case presented by ANI and Wikipedia, and decides that ANI is right and Wikipedia is wrong 3. Wikipedia should take this out on average Indian citizens, and make them pay because Wikipedia was found to be at fault in a court of law.

Makes sense

discuss

order

random_ind_dude|1 year ago

This[0] is the Wikipedia article that ANI has beef with. The claims of propaganda are all supported by ample secondary sources from Indian news organizations like Caravan Magazine and the Ken.

ANI wants Wikipedia to provide the names of the editors that added the details to the article. Once Wikipedia reveals those names, ANI will presumably sue them for defamation and force them to remove their contributions. While the edit history will remain, few are likely to read it.

Suing the editors and forcing them to retract their edits on Wikipedia will have a chilling effect on anyone Indian that tries to point out what ANI and similar organizations are doing. But if Wikipedia blocks India and the issue blows up in the media, ANI will be forced to back off and the article will stay up. Wikipedia then unblocks India. Is it a given that things are going to pan out this way? No, but it's quite likely.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_News_International

tacticalturtle|1 year ago

…yes it does make sense?

They’re complying within the rules fully, but if they decide the rules are too onerous or compromising on their core mission, the legally correct thing to do is to take their ball and go home.

The rest of us not in India don’t want to be affected by the rulings of a Delhi court.

If the citizens of India don’t like this outcome, it’s up to them to fix it.

ToxicMegacolon|1 year ago

Agreed. Nothing wrong with it. I was just trying to fully understand what the other commenter said.

If following the law is such a burden on them then they should by all means pack up and leave. This is also what the Delhi High Court said after Wikipedia chose to ignore its order. This applies to all western institutions and corporations. If the expectation is that, Indian courts and the Indian public should continue to bend over then that is not going to happen.

> The rest of us not in India don’t want to be affected by the rulings of a Delhi court.

How wikipedia choses to follow rulings of Delhi High Court is not India's problem. This is 100% on wikipedia to implement it without a geo block, so maybe you should take this up with Wikipedia.

olivermuty|1 year ago

This ruling seems as corrupt as they go. What kind of untruths did Wikipedia do to cause this to be «defamation»?

Step 3 would be to broadcast to all of India this corrupt ruling.

ToxicMegacolon|1 year ago

> This ruling seems as corrupt as they go

The defamation case is still ongoing. But I guess any ruling that isn't favoring Wikipedia will automatically be "corrupt"

iforgotpassword|1 year ago

Maybe not block it themselves, but put a prominent notice at the top linking to the case and article and see what the Indian government will do next. :)

ToxicMegacolon|1 year ago

I don't think that will help a lot. This my opinion, but I think most Indians treat western sources such as NYT, BBC to be biased/racist against India. If wikipedia were to put a banner on top, it would just end up being another entry in that list.