Justice League: Snyder Cut Fans Criticize Negative Wikipedia Page
Release the Snyder Cut fans asked Wikipedia to remove the negative things about them on the Justice League page. Warner Bros. and DC's first and only ensemble film thus far is fast approaching its second anniversary. However, the conversation about it remains at the forefront of mainstream consciousness thanks to the ongoing calls for the release of Zack Snyder's original cut of the film, with Junkie XL's (the initial composer before Danny Elfman stepped in) score.
Now, it's the proponents of the Justice League movement who are under the spotlight, as they fight off the negative depiction of them on Wikipedia. Most of the page is dedicated to the behind the scenes story of Justice League's changes from Snyder's original version and how much of that has been confirmed to exist, but one section focuses on the fans themselves, highlighting both good and bad elements of their efforts.
An official statement from the major proponents of the campaign was released through their Twitter account (aptly named Release the Snyder Cut), and demanded Wikipedia remove the part of the Justice League page that maligns them. They revealed that they have nothing to do with what's written about them on said site, and were unaware until they were "alerted by some member". While they aren't pointing fingers in public, they maintain that these statements are "both inaccurate and more importantly harmful to us and our goal." Check out their tweets below.
As of writing, an anonymous account has removed the section of the Justice League Wikipedia page citing journalists accusing some members of the Release The Snyder Cut campaign of harassment. The editor left a note in the history section that reads "Fixed an innacurate, biased portrayal of actual events". Prior to that, user Fezmar9 - the creator of the page, who's handled the majority of its editing - reverted a portion of the page after changes made were apparently undiscussed, saying in his own note "Reverting undiscussed massive rewrite that takes the article in a far less neutral and far more promotional point of view ++ much of the information was unsourced, but gave the appearance that it was by maintaining irrelevant reference ++ editor warned".
Incidentally, Wikipedia is a community managed site, and all pages have a "talk page" where proposed changes (particularly big changes such as removing all the negativity) can be discussed to ensure there's an agreement from those editing the page. In fact, the talk page for the article in question already has a lengthy debate about adding the negative experiencing some people have had with elements of the fandom, as the original version of the page was seen as being too positive and lacking opposing views.
If fans do decide to take a heavier hand in managing the page, it could be at risk of being put into "protected status" if the effort to change it without prior discussion on the talk page becomes an "edit war." It's understandable Snyder Cut fans would want to control the narrative about their efforts, particularly the ones that didn't participate in the negative activities mentioned in the Wikipedia page, but without following Wikipedia's established editing guidelines and finding common ground with other editors on the talk page, any attempts to brigade or mass edit the page by fans will likely be reverted by other editors.
This is not the first time that the Justice League Wikipedia page has been at the center of a controversy regarding its Snyder Cut entry. Back in July, Fezmar9 got in a heated discussion about that part of the site going too much into detail. At the end of the day, as long as the Wikipedia page is reflective of the facts, the information should be kept there. In this case, while it's true that many people have had negative experiences with elements of the Snyder Cut fandom, the balanced approach would be to highlight those concerns, but also specify it's only a segment of fans, as others have done a lot of good, helping the campaign raise over $100,000 for suicide prevention. And if this edit war escalates, the page will go into protected status, meaning instead of the page being open for editing to all, changes can only be made by administrators.