There’s a constant feud these days between Bitcoin Core (BTC) supporters and Bitcoin Cash (BCH) proponents right down to the nitty-gritty of nearly every topic in the space, and the arguments continue to this day, relentlessly. One such example is the Bitcoin Cash article hosted on Wiki has been page protected for a couple weeks now for “vandalism.”
Also Read: Hong Kong Alcohol Company Buys 51% of Bitcoin Miner for $60 Million
Bitcoin Cash Wiki Article Gets Locked Down Due to Constant Vandalism
The Wikipedia website is a collaborative effort that allows anyone to edit and contribute additions to Wiki articles for the sake of documenting history online. So often times subjects are edited by anyone online but, if the subject is contentious, an ‘editing war’ can erupt. This means editors argue about the neutrality of the article and Wiki’s dispute resolution services come into play. Right now this is taking place at the Bitcoin Cash article found on Wiki and the page displays a warning about the contention.
“The neutrality of this article is disputed — Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page — Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met,” explains Wiki when you visit the page. Further investigation directs readers and editors to the talk section which states:
There have been attempts to recruit editors of specific viewpoints to this article. If you’ve come here in response to such recruitment, please review the relevant Wikipedia policy on recruitment of editors, as well as the neutral point of view policy. Disputes on Wikipedia are resolved by consensus, not by majority vote.
Most of the Edit Wars Are ‘Bcash’ Related
Going down the rabbit hole further points to an ugly situation where editors are battling about neutrality, and members of the general public are ‘vandalizing’ the page. For instance looking at the discussion on the editor’s ‘talk page’ and the Bitcoin Cash article’s revisions page many of the arguments and edits revolve around calling the cryptocurrency ‘Bcash.’
On April 20th a Wikipedia editor named ‘Foxyjim’ tried to change the name to ‘Bcash’ and argued the name was acceptable for the BCH-focused article and Wikipedia standards. ‘Bcash’ considered a derogatory term by a great majority of the BCH community, and many believe the term is used as an attempt to confuse people. On one occasion an editor and another contributor named ‘Toomuchtalk’ reverted an edit that was attempted by the user Foxyjim.
“Foxyjim obviously doesn’t understand what Wikipedia is — Just because a disagreeing faction created a derogatory name in an effort to obscure the truthful Bitcoin history and are upset that they are using the name Bitcoin does not make the use of Bcash a legitimate historical fact,” the editor explains.
In no way would a supporter of Bitcoin Cash supporter be ok with this!
The New Cypherpunks
The ‘Bcash edit is a common attack made regularly on the article and disputed in Wiki edit warring discussions. Other issues with the page stem from reliable sources, arguments on how the fork was initiated, and debates regarding the Segregated Witness protocol. Throughout the revisions page, there are multiple debated edits every single day. Moreover, the neutrality template on the Bitcoin Cash article has been added and removed a few times over the past few months as well. Last week the lead developer of the BCH client Bitcoin ABC, Amaury Séchet, noticed the neutrality template on the article and made a remark about it to his followers on Twitter, stating:
Bitcoin Cash Wikipedia is now protected due to repeated vandalism — ‘Cypherpunks do Orwellian shit’ is the new ‘Cypherpunk Write Code.’
What do you think about the Bitcoin Cash Wikipedia being vandalized and suffering from edit warring? Let us know your thoughts on this subject in the comments below.
Images via Shutterstock, Wikipedia, and Bitcoin Cash
At news.Bitcoin.com all comments containing links are automatically held up for moderation in the Disqus system. That means an editor has to take a look at the comment to approve it. This is due to the many, repetitive, spam and scam links people post under our articles. We do not censor any comment content based on politics or personal opinions. So, please be patient. Your comment will be published.