The Signpost

In the media

Media coverage of the Arnnon Geshuri no-confidence vote

Arnnon Geshuri

The news media often does a poor job of covering or even understanding the internal workings of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia movement, and the Wikimedia Foundation. However, the recent appointment of Arnnon Geshuri to the WMF Board of Trustees and the growing community complaints regarding his involvement in the High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation cases resulted in some substantial and accurate news coverage.

The first publications to cover the matter were ZDNet in France and Ars Technica in the United States. On January 25, Joe Mullin, Tech Policy Editor at Ars Technica, published "Wikipedia editors revolt, vote 'no confidence' in newest board member", in which he noted:

A flurry of similar stories in other news outlets followed – among them the BBC and Le Monde – in languages including English, French, German, Spanish, Japanese and Chinese. Many of these linked to the no-confidence vote itself as well as to The Signpost's prior coverage; a number of them, including the BBC, Ars Technica, and Fortune, noted that Jimmy Wales, Arnnon Geshuri, and/or the Wikimedia Foundation did not respond to requests for comment.

The media narrative, as told in snippets

List of media articles, in rough order of publication

Jan. 25
Jan. 26
Jan. 27


Jimmy Wales has joined the board of the Guardian Media Group.
Corbin Bleu – huge in Wikipedia if not in our hearts

Do you want to contribute to "In the media" by writing a story or even just an "in brief" item? Edit next week's edition in the Newsroom or contact the editor.
+ Add a comment

Discuss this story

These comments are automatically transcluded from this article's talk page. To follow comments, add the page to your watchlist. If your comment has not appeared here, you can try purging the cache.

Re:The Corbin Bleu article's many translated versions. The leading editor of the English version (both in number of edits and the amount of content added) has been blocked for sockpuppeting, so the most obvious reason for all the translations is that paid editors were responsible. Many of the versions are just straight translations of most of the English version, many are just straight translations of the first line only. I'd guess many are just from Google Translate, without further translation. His popularity doesn't explain anything - if he had 10 times more pageviews in English, the article wouldn't even make the top 1000. His popularity with teenagers or Saudis doesn't explain anything - I don't think these folks are known for their ability or willingness to translate articles. Smallbones(smalltalk) 13:27, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense. Wikipedia has always been a primary target of social media advertising due to Google SEO. I don't know of an easy mechanism to monitor cross-language puffery or how to tackle it given the inaccessibility of so many languages. -- GreenC 18:20, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


The Signpost · written by many · served by Sinepost V0.9 · 🄯 CC-BY-SA 4.0