The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Blogging, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.BloggingWikipedia:WikiProject BloggingTemplate:WikiProject BloggingBlogging
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet
It doesn't work that way. It is not enough to find some citations from journalists. Just because one or two journalists wrote articles and made statements doesn't mean that we now have an **established fact** that we can present as such in a WP article.
No matter the topic or the opinion, you will always find a citation for it and **also a citation for the opposite**. What a WP article needs in order to present something as fact is a general concensus among society and/or science. ʘχ (talk) 09:15, 27 April 2024 (UTC) corrected spelling ʘχ (talk) 09:16, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is that not kind of how it works? The verifiability policy is just that contentious material needs to be cited to a reliable source, and news articles can be that. If we needed enough sources to establish a definite global consensus for everything, I can't imagine we'd ever get much done. Though in this case we'd probably want more than just a couple articles from the same outlet: surprising or "exceptional" claims do demand a higher bar for sourcing. twotwos (talk) 12:24, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I find the inclusion of X on this list problematic. It is a case of "one of these is not like the others" and to assert otherwise, I find irresponsible. Bgregz (talk) 02:19, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe it's a time to think again about the inclusion of Twitter since it's clearly been used by the alt-right that aren't welcome on other platforms Amberkitten (talk) 15:31, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User Mstf221 apparently decided that a reputable newspaper and the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism were unreliable sources and removed X from the list. Does that indicate that this might be something that requires a vote or escalation? I'm not super familiar with WP policies.
165.23.205.95 (talk) 18:56, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In reply to original post and others before previous, I see it relisted, not recategorized: be consistent. I'm sceptical of the vague/confusing term (problematically abbreviates alternative technology); some/many advocate free speech, which people from entire political-economic spectrum advocate. I consider small and decentralised free/libre software social networks (and ones allowing free speech) as alternative to large and centralised corporate ones (significantly censored).
Twitter/X was 2/3 liberal/leftist in earlier 2020s, but unclear now: only 1% more thought they see more liberal than conservative content, but most don't think it leans either way or don't know or don't pay attention[1] though more leftists/liberals mention getting harassed... Twitter/X is mostly conservative-owned (Elon Musk, corporate enablers, ultraconservative/authoritarian theocrats) but I still notice a little censorship (automated or by long-time staff) of criticism of neomarxist identity politics & Islamism except Elon Musk's criticism.--dchmelik☀️🦉🐝🐍(talk|contrib) 07:47, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dear colleague, may I point you to WP:SOAPBOX and WP:WALLOFTEXT. I respect that you have a strong opinion, but the overwhelming use of the platforms in the article by the far-right (and often being owned by the far-right, too) is supported by reliable sources.
So is the fact that Twitter under Elon Musk had an influx of far-right users that enjoy a lack of any meaningful moderation, while things that Elon Musk doesn't like (like the movements of his private jet and the word "cis") are routinely silenced, deboosted and removed. Amberkitten (talk) 11:51, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have strong opinion; my main points were 'alt-tech' is a vague/confusing term (as 'alt-right' is, but more so) and (never mind most sociopolitical-economic comments/questions) Twitter/X has been re-added to the article but not category, so should be consistent: either recategorise or remove (don't care which). Apparently 'Telegram' is also popular among (far-)leftists: I'd like to see more about that or 'alt-left'. There was still some moderation, such as after buyout, a major far-right miltia got unbanned then rebanned, but since then (or Elon Musk's nazi salute) nazi posts are increasing.--dchmelik☀️🦉🐝🐍(talk|contrib) 07:47, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I see what you mean. Also, sorry if I was a bit bitter in the last comment.
There are a few sources that name Twitter as an alt-tech platform ([2][3][4]), but admittedly quite a few also call it a mainstream platform even while recognising its political shift.
I guess it's one of the cases when something fits the definition but there's no good consensus in RS. Which is a shame.
P. S.: alt-left isn't really a thing. There's the far-left and generally people that are to the left of mainstream politics (which are quite right-wing in the UK and especially the US, as well as many other countries), but the term alt-left is not used much to describe them [5]. Amberkitten (talk) 14:47, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speculation by Wikipedia editors (indicated by the word "possibly") has no place in any article. Unless you can find a reliable source that documents alt-right usage of the Hyperbola Linux distribution for this purpose, there isn't a reason to mention it in this article. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:44, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Where is any software being demonized? The article doesn't even mention Hyperbola. The original question asked whether a speculative sentence belonged in the article. It does not. Your followup question is a non-sequitur. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:28, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
UNIX/GNU/Linux (*BSD, GNU) distributions in general aim to avoid all that, without being political. They're normal operating systems (OS, for PCs, servers running most the Internet, etc.); not social networks, so irrelevant to topic. Not wanting censorship/surveillance is a universal human right/preference across political spectrum, so even if its authors were political, and even if some users of OS or other installable software are extremist, most probably aren't. Red Star OS may be an exception, but Communist/Juche... unlikely all users believe Juche... unless many/most do, unless parts are for spreading viewpoints, mobilisation & recruitment, political categorisation is irrelevant (other than possible Workers' Party of Korea surveillance). The article says alt-tech helps with those things, but so does most non-alternative technology, such as banners/fliers/stickers, vehicles, weapons... doesn't mean general-purpose technologies such as those & OS are 'alt-tech'--dchmelik☀️🦉🐝🐍(talk|contrib) 07:53, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
