onehundredsixtynine@sh.itjust.works to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 2 months agoEnglish Wikipedia bans archive.todayen.wikipedia.orgexternal-linkmessage-square34linkfedilinkarrow-up1288arrow-down14
arrow-up1284arrow-down1external-linkEnglish Wikipedia bans archive.todayen.wikipedia.orgonehundredsixtynine@sh.itjust.works to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 2 months agomessage-square34linkfedilink
minus-squareactionjbone@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up40·2 months agoNo. They think that relying on a hostile archive will ultimately harm Wikipedia. They know the shortcomings of the other options.
minus-squareikt@aussie.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 months agoi’ve not used the others are they not as good? i’ll be trying them soon
minus-squareactionjbone@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up9·edit-22 months agoIt’s not that they aren’t as good, necessarily. More that the others do less “grey-hat” stuff, and therefore are less likely to cause harm or alter the content they host.
No.
They think that relying on a hostile archive will ultimately harm Wikipedia.
They know the shortcomings of the other options.
i’ve not used the others are they not as good?
i’ll be trying them soon
It’s not that they aren’t as good, necessarily.
More that the others do less “grey-hat” stuff, and therefore are less likely to cause harm or alter the content they host.