Banana republic? Communist regime? Fascist regime? Which descriptor suits best Wikipedia? In any case, don’t be a dissident. Or you may just disappear. Wikipedians don’t like dissent.

In August 2007, a courageous dissident (ShawnRog) wrote an article on Talend Open Studio. And then in August 2009, another dissident (Jim380) added an article on Talend, the company. But neither ShawnRog nor Jim380 are apparatchiks. Nevertheless their contributions remained published for a little while.

Then a real Wikipedia apparatchik, Ihcoyc, decided that enough was enough, and who were these people who dared write about products and companies he did not know himself. Ihcoyc is a real Wikipedia expert specializing in religious content, and also an attorney from Indiana (per his profile). He actually wrote an essay The presumption of non-notability for Internet related, computing, and services businesses, in which he proclaims:

I presume that a business or product is unlikely to be notable if it:
- Relates to technology, software, computing, or the internet;
- Is a service or publicity business; or
- Provides goods or services to other businesses rather than the general public.

So here goes Ihcoyc, who cannot tolerate stuff he personally does not know about, and he slams the two Talend pieces with a request to delete:

The page is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Talend

His claims: that references like eWeek, PCWorld or InfoWorld, or even Gartner, do not count. If it does not appear in the Indiana Bar Association Gazette, it isn’t relevant to the Wikipedia readers.

Now comes another Wikipedia apparatchik, Mukadderat, the same one who decided to delete the article on Expressor (for the same bad reasons), and strangely enough, he concurs with a terse:

delete nonnotable; one of many.

You will notice the clear explanation that Mukadderat offers.

A few dissidents then chime in. But they will not be heard, because they are Untermenschen or “SPA” – read Single Purpose Accounts, i.e. people who are only interested in one subject – IT in this case. And are tagged as such by the apparatchiks on Talend’s deletion page.

Just to make sure, the page is now tagged with an explanation: “Wikipedia is not a democracy, you can say what you want but we will do what we want”.

Another apparatchik, ThemFromSpace, got several changes of heart. He first said to keep the articles (“Keep the SPAs put in enough references to evidence that the article has the coverage to meet WP:N“). Then to merge the two articles. And finally to delete. Was pressure applied? Did he get scared to loose his editor privileges by siding with dissidents? Who knows…

The story is not over. I doubt Wikipedians will read this blog (after all, they are not interested in IT), and even if they do, it will only unnerve them more. After all, who are mere mortals to question the power of the Wikipedia self-proclaimed gods?

There is a high chance than the articles on Talend get soon deleted by a courageous Wikipedia administrator, like the aptly named “secret” who annihilated Expressor from Wikipedia (even the history of the deletion is nowhere to be found now, unless you bookmarked the page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Expressor. It was still visible last week on Expressor’s page – these guys try to clean their tracks).

Apparently this happens to many small companies. Teresa from Telesperience summarized it well in her post Is Wikipedia discriminating against tech firms?

So – banana republic, fascism, or communism?

The first two types of regimes usually rely on a strong “leader” (whether he be a former sergeant or colonel from a colonial power, or a Führer or Duce – they are all the same) and use repression as a mean to avoid any challenge to their regime. If there is any ideology, it’s always rotten at the core.

Whereas communism started with a generous idea – provide for all members of a community. Of course we all know what happened to this idealism and to which excesses communism has led.

Is Wikipedia like communism? A possibly great idea, but now so corrupted that it only serves its apparatchiks and kills dissidence? 20 years ago, the fall of the Berlin Wall marked the beginning of the end for communism. What will happen to Wikipedia?

Yves

**  UPDATE December 23, 2009 **
The deletion debate is closed, reason prevailed.  A number of Wikipedians did not support this ludicrous call for deletion, and pointed to other abusive cases made by Ihcoyc.  They actually found some good references that I had never even noticed.  Proof that not all Wikipedians are corrupt.  Thanks to all who supported us.
One last word: let’s remain cautious.  Corruption is insidious.