Talk:Alt-tech

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 has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Internet culture C‑class Low‑importance

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 articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Internet culture To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles
Expand : Pick an article from here or here
Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images
Stubs : All stubs are located here
Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}}
- See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention

Blogging (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Blogging, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.BloggingWikipedia:WikiProject BloggingTemplate:WikiProject BloggingBlogging articles

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Conservatism C‑class Low‑importance

	Conservatism portal 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 articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Skepticism C‑class Low‑importance

	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 articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Computing: Websites C‑class Low‑importance

	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 articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Websites.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Internet C‑class Low‑importance

	Internet portal 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 articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Alt-tech article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 90 days

Signal

The only source in the article for Signal being considered alt-tech is this Guardian article:

″Another popular download in recent days has been Signal, an encrypted messaging application with a broad range of users. It offers the ability to send encrypted text messages and make encrypted voice calls, whether one-to-one or in groups. It is not specifically marked by the influence of the far right, nor specifically marketed to them.″

This whole paragraph honestly seems a bit out of place within the Guardian article. Also compare especially to what it says about Telegram two paragraphs later. Unless there is another source associating the platform as alt-tech, I'd suggest removing Signal as an alt-tech platform from the article.--95.91.212.65 (talk) 23:59, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it. The citation is based on observation of Signal getting used by the alt-right is a secure messaging platform, rather than Signal marketing to them. atoponce (talk) 16:53, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

biased language

This article isn't written in a non partisan manner and uses loaded language and prejudiced to control the narrative away from free speech and onto promoting racism, which is obviously not the goal. Needs a full

Promotion of free speech by a platform isn't inherently a bad thing, unlike the implications in this articles wording. 24.207.30.90 (talk) 19:06, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We say what reliable sources say. Do you have any or are you just getting out the WP:SOAPBOX? Dronebogus (talk) 19:09, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Don't bother with wikipedia for anything like this. Complete waste of time talking to these brick walls. 78.191.168.50 (talk) 16:41, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List of Alt-Tech Platforms

Does the list of platforms in its current form really add much? Almost half of the listed platforms are defunct or their notability seems to stem from a single reference, as they either don't have an article at all or just a short mention in some other article. With some others it seems questionable why they are included in the list when other platforms are not. Telegram is probably the most notable alt-tech platform (here's WaPo pretty much calling them the poster child of alt-tech) and not in the list. Meanwhile Kiwi Farms doesn't seem to fit in with the other platforms at all, with it not really being an alternative to something and the Forward.com source being the only one to even label them as alt-tech. 95.90.232.115 (talk) 00:34, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]