# Everipedia links **URL:** \ **Category:** MusicBrainz\ **Tags:** wikipedia, musicbrainz, relationships\ **Created:** [September 11, 2019, 5:16pm UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/everipedia-links/443064 "2019-09-11T17:16:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![mmirG](https://community.metabrainz.org/user_avatar/community.metabrainz.org/mmirg/32/1327_2.png) [@mmirG](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/mmirG)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2019, 7:26am UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/everipedia-links/443064/21 "2019-09-12T07:26:30Z")
You refer to negatives around Everipedia. But the one we use now also has negatives. Which one has the least, or most, negatives is not currently clear. Therefore a decision around adding EvPed to the other databases whitelist only on the basis that EvPed has some negatives would not be a soundly based decision. ---
**Author:** ![anon18945670](https://community.metabrainz.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/5daacb/32.png) [@anon18945670](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/anon18945670)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2019, 7:31am UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/everipedia-links/443064/22 "2019-09-12T07:31:52Z")
> [@mmirG](#): > > Therefore a decision around adding EvPed to the other databases whitelist only on the basis that EvPed has some negatives would not be a soundly based decision. No and I made clear I am for adding Everipedia, just not for replacing Wikipedia with it. I’m sure Wikipedia has negatives, but you spoke about a “toxic harmful work environment”, so I assumed you have some specifics, so I asked you about it. ---
**Author:** ![mmirG](https://community.metabrainz.org/user_avatar/community.metabrainz.org/mmirg/32/1327_2.png) [@mmirG](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/mmirG)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2019, 7:55am UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/everipedia-links/443064/23 "2019-09-12T07:55:11Z")
The organized bullying of volunteers, as happens repeatedly on Wikipedia, inevitably has harmful effects on the physical and mental health of those bullied. This qualifies Wikipedia as a toxic workplace. ---
**Author:** ![hiccup](https://community.metabrainz.org/user_avatar/community.metabrainz.org/hiccup/32/5512_2.png) [@hiccup](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/hiccup)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2019, 11:58am UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/everipedia-links/443064/25 "2019-12-18T11:58:14Z")
Interesting, never heard of it before. Doing a quick check, it seems popular with vloggers, youtubers, influencers, etc. The mentioned ex-wikipedia guy who recently joined Everipedia has already left again. (he also didn’t last a year at wikipedia) To me it looks like an accident waiting to happen. But perhaps some artists that are too insignificant for wikipedia will have an everipedia entry? Since the vast contents of everipedia is just a plain copy of wikipedia, that would then probably be the only reason to consider it for MB? The ‘accused of a toxic workplace’ argument seems completely irrelevant to me. Would you also ignore or ban record companies or artists that have been accused of such by someone? ---
**Author:** ![mmirG](https://community.metabrainz.org/user_avatar/community.metabrainz.org/mmirg/32/1327_2.png) [@mmirG](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/mmirG)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2019, 12:49pm UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/everipedia-links/443064/26 "2019-12-18T12:49:40Z")
It was suggested that Everipedia had negatives. The “toxic workplace” of WP was both an example of negatives not stopping MB using a source and also an area in which Everipedia may be superior to WP. So expanding from that, “No, I am arguing that we already use ethically problematic record companies and ethically problematic Artists already and should, within undefined limits\*, continue to use them.” - Humans are unimaginably creative, and if some way of doing significant on-going harm through MusicBrainz was discovered/invented and utilized then MB would have to prevent it, either voluntarily by self-regulation or under force of external regulation. “How could harm happen?”, some ask. Answer: See, “unimaginably creative”. ---
**Author:** ![mmirG](https://community.metabrainz.org/user_avatar/community.metabrainz.org/mmirg/32/1327_2.png) [@mmirG](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/mmirG)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2019, 1:11pm UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/everipedia-links/443064/27 "2019-12-18T13:11:25Z")
> **[The IQ fund of Everipedia is here](https://en.cryptonomist.ch/2019/11/26/iq-fund-everipedia/)** > > 5% of the circulating supply of IQ tokens will be distributed “Less than 24 hours ago, Everipedia announced the launch of **IQ Projects** , a fund dedicated to **distributing 5% of the circulating supply of IQ tokens** to those who will help and improve the Everipedia ecosystem.” There are a lot of words and concepts here that I don’t grok. But would there be possible synergies around Everipedia $IQ and gamifying MB? And even Everipedia utilizing MusicBrainz data? [Previous page](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/everipedia-links/443064.md?page=1)