Talk:American Edge Project

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Internet

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Politics

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

United States

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Supermind?

The page has a link to Supermind, but the various disambiguation links have nothing to do with an AI project by China. Does that project need its own page? Assambrew (talk) 02:45, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It does. I am working on it now.PreviouslyanIP (talk) 21:54, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks. Assambrew (talk) 06:16, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

restoring previous version

Noting ongoing attempts to whitewash this article; I've restored to the version before it started. Valereee (talk) 14:21, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should address edits that you disagree with on a case-by-case basis. IMHO you threw the baby out with the bath water. PreviouslyanIP (talk) 15:27, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PreviouslyanIP, the edits you are making remove all criticism of the project and add its own marketing language in. This appears to be whitewashing. If you'd like to discuss these changes, please bring the changes you want to see here first. Please revert yourself and let's discuss. Valereee (talk) 17:11, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to add criticism back in right now.PreviouslyanIP (talk) 17:18, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. I see intermediate edits that really do remove stuff that should not have been removed. I am trying to sort through it. PreviouslyanIP (talk) 17:25, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think all the criticisms you put in originally are back in. I will go back and check again tonight when I have more time. PreviouslyanIP (talk) 17:38, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I restored a couple more things. Valereee (talk) 11:39, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also have removed a ton of stuff that was only sourced to the group itself. Valereee (talk) 12:05, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

reversion

Hey, PreviouslyanIP, actually this addition does not in any way represent "perfectly legitimate sources". Even the language is problematic:

The American Edge Project has been very critical of China's Supermind AI project. Supermind includes 300 million scientific papers, 120 million patents, and detailed information on 130 million researchers. Supermind is being used to both build human capital and gather intelligence. China's security services are using it to place agents in jobs with access to important information, recruit technical personnel, and identify targets for hacking operations.

In a 2022 op-ed, American Edge Project CEO Doug Kelly argued that anti-trust legislation targeting large technology companies pending in Congress could hobble the United States in its efforts to maintain its technological lead over China.

In April 2024, the American Edge Project and PitchBook released a study entitled American Innovation Under Siege: Venture Capital Data Reveal Risks From Rising Global Regulatory Overreach.

Why does Wikipedia or readers care? We report what others are saying. If no one else is discussing something, we don't include it.

And re: the language: you're reporting what AE is saying in Wikivoice. Valereee (talk) 17:14, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How can an organization not be a reliable source for its own opinions? This has been SOP on Wikipedia for a long time. Also, I think you are conflating notability of the subject and notability of the content of the article. The content of the article is not subject to notability requirements. It merely needs to be enyclopedic. PreviouslyanIP (talk) 17:19, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't really matter what their opinions are if no one else is talking about those opinions. We report what reliable, independent sources are saying. Nothing else really matters. You've already added their own mission statement, which is really more than is necessary, and I've let it stay. We don't report their every opinion. Valereee (talk) 17:22, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Language that you yourself added also depends on primary sources. Organizations like the Benton Foundation and Brookings are not independent. In fact they are active participants in the debates that the subject of the article participates in. It would be very strange to include their opinions but not those of the subject of the article. PreviouslyanIP (talk) 17:28, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's not what WP:independent means. Valereee (talk) 17:36, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at the direct citation to Public Citizen. That is not an independent third party and they are only a reliable source for their own opinions. PreviouslyanIP (talk) 17:35, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's their opinion on this subject. It's not their opinion on themselves. Valereee (talk) 17:36, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an exampe: I created Supermind AI and quoted/sourced to American Edge. Perfectly legit. Valereee (talk) 17:37, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to revert that reversion. The WP:ONUS is on you as the editor who wants to include, but we can keep discussing if you like, or you can go ask for feedback at WP:NPOVN or at WP:Teahouse. In the meantime, as disputed content, it doesn't stay in. Valereee (talk) 17:39, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The language in green above is not about AEP's opinions of itself. It is a very careful summary of their opinions on these issues. It is quite clearly enyclopedic content. PreviouslyanIP (talk) 17:47, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's really not. It's saying what they believe, and it's saying it in Wikivoice (that is, as if WP were reporting what independent RS are saying.) Please consider going to WP:Teahouse. Valereee (talk) 17:49, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]