Editors on Wikipedia had been discussing whether or not to remove archive.is (aka archive.today et al) references from English Wikipedia after it came to light that the website was leveraging code to DDoS a particular blog that the archive.is owner has beef with (essentially every time a user used the website, they were aiding in the DDoS).
In the course of investigating this DDoS situation, it also came to light that the information contained in the archive itself had been edited by the website owner to further their beef with the aforementioned blog. When this came to light, Wikipedia announced that archive.is/archive.today/etc would no longer be accepted reference URLs and they’ve begun purging them from English Wikipedia.
A decent summary is here, and the discussion page on Wikipedia with more specifics is here.
Archive: https://archive.is/2026.02.28-093214/https://www.ft.com/content/e3366881-0622-40a7-9c34-a0d82e3d573e
We shouldn’t use archive.is anymore I’m afraid. I don’t know a good alternative, but archive.today links are no longer trustworthy.
What happened? Were they caught altering archives?
I believe so, yes.
Editors on Wikipedia had been discussing whether or not to remove archive.is (aka archive.today et al) references from English Wikipedia after it came to light that the website was leveraging code to DDoS a particular blog that the archive.is owner has beef with (essentially every time a user used the website, they were aiding in the DDoS).
In the course of investigating this DDoS situation, it also came to light that the information contained in the archive itself had been edited by the website owner to further their beef with the aforementioned blog. When this came to light, Wikipedia announced that archive.is/archive.today/etc would no longer be accepted reference URLs and they’ve begun purging them from English Wikipedia.
A decent summary is here, and the discussion page on Wikipedia with more specifics is here.
https://lemmy.world/post/43472467