The Signpost

File:Old man reading newspaper early in the morning at Basantapur-IMG 6800.jpg
Bijay Chaurasia
CC BY-SA 4.0
300
In the media

Delhi High Court considers Caravan and Ken for evaluating the ANI vs. WMF case

Contribute   —  
Share this
By Bri, Oltrepier, Red-tailed hawk, and Smallbones

Delhi High Court Justice will read the sources

Reading all of the sources involved in a case must require a lot of time and patience... Luckily, in this case, they are all neatly listed in a single article (albeit black-locked)!

Bar and Bench, an Indian source for news on the judicial system, reported that Justice Subramonium Prasad, who is hearing the Wikimedia Foundation's appeal of a possible injunction in the Asian News International case, has said that he will read the sources used to reference the alleged defamation, with a particular focus on articles published by The Caravan and The Ken. A similar article appeared in Medianama. If the sources cited support the text included in the Wikipedia article about ANI, then Justice Prasad may not impose an injunction upon the WMF.

As per the Bar and Bench report, the Justice said that "the courts in case of 19 1(a) ... have said that injunction must be exception and not the rule. Keeping that in mind, I have to then look into the question of irreparable loss, prima facie case and balance of connivance."

"I will also read the articles ... to see whether the (edits) are borne out of the articles or not. Obviously, if they are not borne out of the articles, they cannot do it [publish the claims]. Therefore, I can, to that extent, even ask them to take down those offending statements," the Court said.

The Court added that if it finds that such inference, as made in the edits, can be drawn from the articles, then it may not pass a takedown order.

However, it also wondered whether it can go into such detail at the interim stage.

"This is an understanding of the editor of what the source means. If the understanding is so defamatory that it is relying on something which actually does not mean it at all, then the person can be restrained... again the question is even if it can be understood in that way, then would the court go deeper into that aspect to come to a conclusion as to whether in no circumstances can it be construed it as that at all."

Pertinently, The Caravan and The Ken are not party to ANI's defamation suit before the High Court.

The defamation suit was filed alleging that Wikipedia was allowing defamatory edits to its page on the online encyclopedia.

The Court also said it would later examine whether Wikipedia is only an intermediary or a publisher to whom different rules will apply.

Bar and Bench

Justice Prasad may not even have too much reading to do. As of July 1, 2024, just before ANI filed their lawsuit, there were only two references to The Caravan in the whole article about the news agency:

And just one reference to The Ken:

The page contains eight more news stories cited from Alt News, BBC, The Diplomat, The Guardian, Le Monde, Newslaundry, Outlook magazine, and Politico.

See previous Signpost coverage about the ongoing case here and here. – S

Prison or worse: the stories of volunteers imprisoned for editing Wikipedia

In a recent article for Boing Boing, named "From keyboard to prison cell: The dangerous side of Wikipedia editing", Ellsworth Toohey reminds us of four Wikipedia editors who have been imprisoned and one editor who has been executed for editing Wikipedia.

See List of people imprisoned for editing Wikipedia and previous coverage in the Signpost. – S

Morrissey: Wikipedia not "intelligent enough to set the record straight"

TKTK
Morrissey has something to say about Morrissey.

The Smiths' former frontman Morrissey laments what he considers to be inaccuracies on the Wikipedia page about him. As reported by NME, Morrissey listed the purported inaccuracies about his alleged past affiliations to two different punk rock bands: The Nosebleeds – briefly active between 1976 and 1978 – and Slaughter & the Dogs – formed in 1975 and still going. Morrissey's "Madness" missive, posted on his own website on December 1, stated:

“Wikipedia confidently list me as an ex-member of Slaughter And The Dogs, and an ex-member of The Nosebleeds. I did not ever join The Nosebleeds and I have no connection whatsoever with Slaughter And The Dogs. Is there anyone at Wikipedia intelligent enough to set the record straight? Probably not.”

But somebody has been quick enough to edit out details about both bands from Morrissey’s article, with a few users engaging in reciprocal reverts. The page, which has been white-locked for a while now, no longer contains any reference to Slaughter and The Dogs; on the other hand, phrases about Morrissey’s ties to The Nosebleeds both in the introduction and the "Early life" section are now referenced by the NME article. The Wikipedia page about the Nosebleeds had also been modified to reflect Morrissey’s claims, before user Martey reverted the edits. The article for Slaughter & the Dogs has actually stayed untouched since October 21, and never included any major reference to Morrissey.

Morrissey is not shy about controversies, and he might have a point, so Stereogum put together a lengthy investigation on his past relationships with both bands. According to their report, in John Robb’s 2006 oral history Punk Rock, Slaughter & the Dogs' guitarist Mick Rossi stated that Morrissey auditioned for the band right after their first singer, Wayne Barrett-McGrath, had departed. Morrissey recorded four demos in the process, but none of these recordings have ever surfaced, and the artist never joined the group on a stable basis.

However, the game gets trickier when discussing The Nosebleeds. The Italian edition of Rolling Stone noted that the only significant reference to that band left on Morrissey's Wikipedia page, which mentions that Morrissey had agreed to join them as the lead vocalist in November 1977, is supported by a citation of David Bret's 2004 biography Morrissey: Scandal and Passion. The Stereogum report managed to find an even older source supporting this version: Johnny Rogan's 1992 biography Morrissey & Marr: The Severed Alliance, where a mutual friend of the future Smiths leader and his fellow member Johnny Marr confirmed that Morrissey had briefly joined The Nosebleeds, while Rogan himself stated that the artist had even co-written several of the group's songs with guitarist Billy Duffy.

Duffy's website provides more evidence of Morrissey's involvement with the punk rock band, as he joined him for at least two live gigs in 1978, the latter of which was even reviewed by NME, and later recreated in the 2017 biographical film England Is Mine. To his credit, Morrissey did acknowledge this performance in his 2013 memoir Autobiography, but insisted that it was a one-off and that he was "lumbered" with the line-up for that evening being billed as The Nosebleeds.

So, while Stereogum tried their best to fact-check Morrissey's claims, it’s safe to say that the trip down his past music ventures is just as confusing as some of the various recent controversies. Still, as suggested by the magazine, if anyone manages to put the man himself "in touch with Mr. Wikipedia", maybe we can finally "set the record straight". Let us just make all those involved aware of the rules on paid editing and COI, and let a reliable source sort it all out before editing the articles again. – O

In brief

Do you fancy some Kimchi between an article and another?



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 leave a tip on the suggestions page.


S
In this issue
+ 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.

Isn't the Annie Rauwerda entry just a repost of the Asterisk Mag interview from November? (Come to think of it, was that ever reported on?) Arcorann (talk) 00:43, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why did they block those search engines other than Google? Google harvests more data than any other search engine. Qwant should have been offered. This is a total mistake by the schools. Ahri Boy (talk) 02:41, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Herald's article ends with a quote from the councilmember that gives a clear intention/reason, I think - However, the site does offer a wide range of topics, some which may not be appropriate for all age groups. We have suspended access to Wikipedia at present while we undertake a further comprehensive review. They seem to be bumping up against WP:NOTCENSORED. FifthFive (talk) 17:08, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]



       

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