Great work to those who uncovered this! It's always hard to tell how many other instances like this there are that never come to light. {{u|Sdkb}}talk00:44, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the report. It's very clear. We still need to see if they have artificially improve the pageviews of the article which is really high compared to other politicians. PAC2 (talk) 07:34, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PAC2: Well, that's a Catch-22, now. The attention brought by coverage of this manipulation — even this article we're reading right now — will itself have the effect of further inflating those pages' view counts. Fortunately, Wikipedia article views don't translate into anything beyond what they are at face value. It's not as though we're multiplying the campaign's advertising dollars or anything. FeRDNYC (talk) 22:20, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"The publisher wanted to meet about 'a political team that coordinates to direct several Wikipedia pages about its candidate and circumvent the rules of the encyclopedia', which he was investigating with Bresson (the author of the book)." What book? It has not been mentioned before, has it? BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 03:31, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This text: "According to the book At the Heart of Z by Bresson. The Discord channel" should IMHO be replaced with "According to the book Au Cœur du Z ("At the Heart of Z") by Bresson, the Discord channel". Apokrif (talk) 06:11, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
← Back to Special report