Wikipedia has long been a widely used knowledge source, yet its reliability is not beyond question. Critics point to the presence of misleading or questionable content, and this view has been echoed by legal and academic observers. Vadim Vinogradov, the dean of the Faculty of Law at the Higher School of Economics and head of the legislative activities commission of ROCIT, has commented on the potential for state action against the platform as part of broader discussions about responsibility and content moderation. He emphasized that popularity does not grant immunity from legal accountability, especially when a source’s materials may contravene national laws or promote actions considered illegal within the country. Vinogradov noted past cases where major platforms faced governmental scrutiny and sanctions, underscoring that any action against Wikipedia would follow the same legal logic applied to other services considered to be in violation of local regulations. The assertion is that platforms cannot describe, promote, or facilitate activities that are illegal in the jurisdiction, and Wikipedia’s current practices could be interpreted in that light. In discussing these issues, Vinogradov pointed to the indirect role played by VPNs in steering users toward blocked networks, suggesting that attempts to bypass restrictions inevitably raise compliance questions for both the platforms involved and the users who access them. His remarks imply a broader trend toward stricter enforcement of information controls and closer scrutiny of how digital services operate within national borders.
Furthermore, Vinogradov explained that accessing certain international networks without specialized tools requires the use of VPNs or other circumvention methods. He suggested that calls to subscribe to or engage with content on blocked social networks may be functionally equivalent to promoting or distributing VPN services, which are tightly regulated in the country. The core concern, he argued, is not only the content itself but the manner in which users can reach it, including through intermediary services that enable access to restricted platforms. This line of reasoning situates the Wikipedia case within a broader discussion of information policy and the legitimate reach of the state to curb activities that undermine or circumvent local rules.
Anton Nemkin, a member of the State Duma Committee on Information Policy, Information Technologies and Communications, predicts that the Wikipedia case marks only the outset of a longer series of disclosures and regulatory actions. He warned that Roskomnadzor will not limit its attention to overt violations but will pursue a rigorous enforcement regime across a spectrum of online resources. He stressed that attempts to advertise or imply endorsement of VPN services in connection with evading restrictions will face immediate scrutiny and penalties. In his view, simply directing users to foreign sources or to accounts that cannot be accessed without a circumvention tool can be treated as promotional activity for VPNs. The emphasis here is on preventing any form of assistance that aids users in bypassing state-imposed blocks.
March 1 marked a notable shift, when Roskomnadzor began blocking access to materials detailing methods of circumventing digital blocks, including VPNs. The agency also signaled that sites promoting or advertising bypass tools would be blocked, reinforcing the principle that information facilitating evasion is itself a target for restriction. This development is framed as part of a wider effort to ensure compliance with existing laws governing information access and dissemination, a policy posture that has brought renewed attention to how digital platforms moderate content and respond to government directives.
Speaking from past leadership roles, Anton Gorelkin noted that the possibility of Wikipedia facing blockades in Russia would align with legal provisions that prohibit advertising and the popularization of tools designed to bypass internet restrictions. The prospect is presented as a reminder of the ongoing legal and regulatory dialogue surrounding online information in the country. Observers are watching closely to see how these measures will be applied to large, global resources that attract wide audiences while navigating complex local requirements.
Taken together, these statements illustrate a climate in which national regulators increasingly expect digital services to comply with local norms and laws. The discussions about Wikipedia are not merely about one platform but about how information is shared, accessed, and regulated within a national framework. They reflect a broader debate about freedom of information, the responsibilities of information carriers, and the consequences for platforms that fail to align with the legal environment in which they operate. The central question remains how state action will balance openness with compliance, and how users will respond to evolving rules around access, moderation, and permissible content. This ongoing dialogue continues to shape the future of online information in Russia and serves as a reference point for global conversations on digital policy and platform governance. [Citation: Regulatory authorities and academic observers]