     
 
The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

> Help Topic
Here is the topic you chose to view
Enter keywords to search for   

> Complaints Department
Here is the topic you chose to view

There are several options for visitors who wish to lodge complaints regarding content found on this website. Some, however, are more reliable than others.

Option 1: E-Mail the Administrators

If you're desperately unhappy with some of the content you find here, you might wish to try sending a description of your concerns, along with URL links to the offending content, to this e-mail address:



Failure to provide URL links to the offending content may not prevent your concerns from being addressed, but it will almost certainly hold things up for a while.

Option 2: Join the Forum

Another way to influence the content of this website is to become a member in your own right, and through well-honed, reasonable arguments, try to convince the other members here of the validity and moral/ethical justifiability of your position. It sounds silly, of course, but this has been known to work on occasion.

Option 3: Join WikiEN-L

WikiEN-L is the general mailing list for the English Wikipedia. Complaining about Wikipedia Review content there probably won't help much unless you're mainly just looking for sympathy, but sometimes sympathy is all that's really needed.

Option 4: Help us change Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act

This is the infamous US legal statute that essentially allows website operators to sit idly by while their users post terrible things about people. This may not fully apply to us because the site is owned by a citizen of the UK, but regardless, making website operators accountable for the content of their "Web 2.0" community sites has long been a stated goal of several Wikipedia Review members. Helping those members to achieve that goal can only increase our already-high estimation of your personal character and moral calibre.

Option 5: Suggest Technical Improvements

This option is somewhat hit-or-miss, but if you can devise a worthy suggestion for an improvement to the board's user interface, there's a chance that our amateurish attempts to implement it will bring the site down completely, effectively eliminating not only the offending content, but the site itself. The downside, of course, is that the attempt to implement your suggestion might actually work, thereby making the site better and causing your clever plan to backfire.

Option 6: Sue the Wikimedia Foundation

This may seem counter-intuitive, since your presumed objective is to affect content here on Wikipedia Review, which is not controlled in any way by the Wikimedia Foundation or its management. However, the sheer amusement value of such a lawsuit will probably make you an heroic figure among the Wikipedia Review membership, and we always like to do nice things for our heroes. (Please note, however, that you have to actually file the lawsuit - mere threats are insufficient.)

Option 6: Go Nuclear

If you have access to nuclear weaponry, you might try using it on whatever city the site's hosting company is currently located in. Unfortunately, this is also the least effective option, since the site is backed up regularly and can always be moved elsewhere, and the personal ramifications of your having detonated a nuclear device in a major city will probably lead to your arrest and imprisonment - unless you happen to be the CEO of a large US corporation, since those people seem to be able to get away with anything. (Then again, with the Democrats in power, it's possible that even CEO's are not completely safe.)

Option 7: The "Where Do You Go When You've Run Out of Options" Option

You might try reading this, though it probably won't help much.
-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 24th 6 17, 2:00pm
 
     
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=7dffabd514b1789472b79f39cc182a41&act=Help&CODE=01&HID=17
wikipediareview.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2017-26
42340
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:G4LSXZCAYVWGOT2OSBU3KF3QONGMUX2W
<urn:uuid:e0f9d781-e5d1-4947-ac9a-7a69a1117579>
2017-06-24T14:00:30Z
192.254.236.99
application/xhtml+xml
sha1:P2IKLVOWI3DQ3BPNFODGMUQ75JSGTJ35
<urn:uuid:92a64389-77e1-4666-a21e-16b7e58c9582>
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=7dffabd514b1789472b79f39cc182a41&act=Help&CODE=01&HID=17
length
response
<urn:uuid:3ed2f66e-a29b-474d-be90-2295c64ba32e>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-149-139-88.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2017-26
operator: Common Crawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for June 2017
publisher: Common Crawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf