[lolinder]

Flagged usually means that users did it, not mods. I flagged it for two reasons:

* The article is nearly devoid of substance. Nearly all of the content is just copy/pasted from a Twitter argument, with a non-trivial amount of text devoted to detailing the like counts for each post. That's not the kind of post I like to see on the front page, but anger about Wikipedia's handling of money gets a lot of upvotes based on the title alone, regardless of the quality of the content. The flag mechanism is there for precisely this situation: to remove posts that will lead to low-quality knee-jerk reactions instead of thoughtful discussion.

* The submitter seems to have a vendetta against Wikipedia: if you look at their submissions [0] with showdead turned on, 25/34 of their submissions are negative posts about Wikipedia. That's a weirdly single-minded fixation on targeting negativity at a single company, and something that I'd like to see discouraged on HN. Disliking Wikipedia is fine, but if most of your interactions with HN are trying to push that dislike on the community, that's unhealthy.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=kurtreed

[avg_dev]

I think those points make sense. I do think there is some material within though, which is that the tweets had some point. Sure the reporting was not really interesting, but I thought the source material was, personally.