Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement

The Wikipedia War

A recent high-profile dispute over the user-written encyclopedia's veracity has the site rethinking some of its rules.

By Eric Hellweg

Friday, December 16, 2005

smaller text tool iconmedium text tool iconlarger text tool icon

In 1728, Ephraim Chambers, a mapmaker in London, published the Cyclopaedia -- the first encyclopedia to include cross references. Almost 275 years later, Wikipedia, the online, user-created encyclopedia, is championed for its volunteer model and its elaborate system of cross-referencing and verifications. But the Wikipedia model has had a rough couple of weeks -- ever since the mainstream media jumped on the story of Robert F. Kennedy confidante John Seigenthaler’s outrage at false information posted in his Wikipedia entry.

The concept of Wikipedia -- and the general idea of "wikis," or user-edited Web pages -- is notable because it embodies one of the key cultural movements of the decade. Called Web 2.0, it's the notion that the Internet should be fueled by user-generated content -- blogs, wikis, podcasts, and user-created add-ons to programs such as Google Maps and Firefox. The desire of people to contribute online content is as old as the medium itself; now software improvements and broadband adoption make it easier than ever. With the tools for content creation in the hands of single individuals, not just companies and institutions, Web 2.0 means a more democratic Internet, and a truer voice, or at least a broader one.

“When people think of Web 2.0, they’re thinking of Wikipedia,” says Larry Sanger, a co-founder of Wikipedia, who's no longer with the enterprise and currently involved in a new online encyclopedia project.

But the Web 2.0 concept, and Wikipedia itself, still have some growing up to do. In part because of the Seigenthaler flap, Wikipedia is going through a very public coming-of-age. “The last two weeks, it’s been hard to get any work done,” says Jimmy Wales, founder of Wikipedia and president of the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation.

At the heart of the issue is a problem that many startups would kill to have: overwhelming interest in their product. In 2001, Sanger predicted that, with a little luck, Wikipedia would have 80,000 articles by 2008. The site currently has more than 850,000 in English alone. Throw in 200 other world languages, and the total rises to 3.7 million.

Wikipedia was founded with a radical premise: thousands of enthusiastic volunteers would scan the entries regularly, ensuring that they remained truthful -- or at least not erroneous for very long. In addition to being reviewed by the general public, Wikipedia articles would also be vetted by administrators and “page watchers.”

That's exactly what has come about. But with the huge proliferation of Wikipedia entries, as well as the built-in ability for anyone to contribute to the site, the occasional vandal has appeared -- and gone undetected for too long.

Comments

  • Baou and what Wikipedia has to do
    First, its unfortunate that you legitimize Baous actions and the inflammatory articles on news.baou.com. They dont deserve to be valid voices in any discussion of Wikipedia.

    Second, your conclusion is a bit overblown. Maybe Wikipedia *doesnt* have to adopt new tactics. I would argue the process is working despite recent and occasional problems.

    The information and usefulness of Wikipedia content is improving daily--so whats wrong?
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Aaron E. Klemm)
    12/16/2005
    Posts:1
  • The wikipedia war
    An informative article for I, as it shook me out of my nievity, that all that I read on-line, must be factual!
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Ivor Smith)
    12/16/2005
    Posts:1
    • funny that the writer  s##t him self while trying to discredit wiki.
      unfortunetly the writers atempt to prove the problems with the system just proved it works better than he knows.

      he wrote
      I edited the entry dedicated to musician Tom Waits. In a section on the artist in the 1990s, I wrote that Waits had played a concert with Elvis Costello, Elvis Presley, and Mr. Ed (the talking horse). Within 24 hours, the Presley and Mr. Ed references were removed, but the Elvis Costello citation -- also false, but not as glaringly so -- remained

      however
      Faithful [H] reader Peter Hamilton (who I’m assuming is a Roy Orbison fan) pointed out that the information of Costello and Waits playing together is indeed true. A quick google search netted me the tell tale result. A simple click under Actors on the more link revealed that both aforementioned artists did indeed play this concert together
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (funny article)
      12/18/2005
      Posts:1
    • funny that the writer  s##t him self while trying to discredit wiki.
      unfortunetly the writers atempt to prove the problems with the system just proved it works better than he knows.

      he wrote
      I edited the entry dedicated to musician Tom Waits. In a section on the artist in the 1990s, I wrote that Waits had played a concert with Elvis Costello, Elvis Presley, and Mr. Ed (the talking horse). Within 24 hours, the Presley and Mr. Ed references were removed, but the Elvis Costello citation -- also false, but not as glaringly so -- remained

      however
      Faithful [H] reader Peter Hamilton (who I’m assuming is a Roy Orbison fan) pointed out that the information of Costello and Waits playing together is indeed true. A quick google search netted me the tell tale result. A simple click under Actors on the more link revealed that both aforementioned artists did indeed play this concert together
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (funny article)
      12/18/2005
      Posts:1
  • Wrong
    Too bad Tom Waits DID play with Elvis Costello.  You think the author could at least check information he was trying to falsify.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (James)
    12/18/2005
    Posts:1
    • need link
      Re: Wrong by James: Give us a link to a reliable source saying that Waits played with Elvis Costello in the 1990s--and well even credit you! Thanks. -- Editor
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (TR editor)
      12/19/2005
      Posts:1
    • need link
      Re: Wrong by James: Give us a link to a reliable source saying that Waits played with Elvis Costello in the 1990s--and well even credit you! Thanks. -- Editor
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (TR editor)
      12/19/2005
      Posts:1
  • Wikipedia works and at the same time does not work..
    My profs at the University used to say that any reference to Wikipedia in any paper you submit, will be considered a minus and crossed-out and I think they are right about it. It is a good idea to get a first glimpse at a problem by looking at the wiki, but for more information, one should consider standard references and books.

    However, an entire unnoticed problem is bias in the wikipedia. It is not so much about factual errors, but rather the supremacy of political belief systems. While this is not a big deal in the US wiki, it is in Europe. I have seen that socialist content doesnt allow any criticism on their pages, while they censor anything that goes beyond their political scheme. This might be a big problem in the future and is why I abstain from using any social science pages from the Wiki.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Max)
    12/18/2005
    Posts:1
    • Europe
      What you are saying about Europe content is quite wrong. But may be its just that you dont agree with the content.
      When you use censorship to tell the truth, its only the truth of the censor.
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (Sly)
      12/19/2005
      Posts:1
    • Europe
      What you are saying about Europe content is quite wrong. But may be its just that you dont agree with the content.
      When you use censorship to tell the truth, its only the truth of the censor.
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (Sly)
      12/19/2005
      Posts:1
  • Wikipedia  accuracy
    It seems to me that Wikipedia is only slightly different than any other media source in history (newspapers, TV, etc.).  There is always bias, either cultural or intentional.  The difference discussed here is the transient nature of the information, so if referencing a hard copy should always be made, particularly noting specific date and time of the Wikipedia image.  Does Wikipedia have a CM system so that, if necessary, the history canbe rebuilt?
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Andy)
    12/19/2005
    Posts:1
    • Tom Waits and Elvis Costello
      While I dont doubt that Tom Waits and Elvis Costello played together some time in the 1990s, my false Wikipedia entry said that he played with Tom Waits at the Raven Theater in Healdsburg CA in 1996. I was at that show, and have a recording of it. Elvis Costello did not play.
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (Eric Hellweg)
      12/20/2005
      Posts:1
    • Tom Waits and Elvis Costello
      While I dont doubt that Tom Waits and Elvis Costello played together some time in the 1990s, my false Wikipedia entry said that he played with Tom Waits at the Raven Theater in Healdsburg CA in 1996. I was at that show, and have a recording of it. Elvis Costello did not play.
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (Eric Hellweg)
      12/20/2005
      Posts:1
  • Wikipedia  accuracy
    It seems to me that Wikipedia is only slightly different than any other media source in history (newspapers, TV, etc.).  There is always bias, either cultural or intentional.  The difference discussed here is the transient nature of the information, so if referencing a hard copy should always be made, particularly noting specific date and time of the Wikipedia image.  Does Wikipedia have a CM system so that, if necessary, the history canbe rebuilt?
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Andy)
    12/19/2005
    Posts:1
  • Baou and what Wikipedia has to do
    First, its unfortunate that you legitimize Baous actions and the inflammatory articles on news.baou.com. They dont deserve to be valid voices in any discussion of Wikipedia.

    Second, your conclusion is a bit overblown. Maybe Wikipedia *doesnt* have to adopt new tactics. I would argue the process is working despite recent and occasional problems.

    The information and usefulness of Wikipedia content is improving daily--so whats wrong?
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Aaron E. Klemm)
    12/16/2005
    Posts:1
  • The wikipedia war
    An informative article for I, as it shook me out of my nievity, that all that I read on-line, must be factual!
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Ivor Smith)
    12/16/2005
    Posts:1
  • Wrong
    Too bad Tom Waits DID play with Elvis Costello.  You think the author could at least check information he was trying to falsify.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (James)
    12/18/2005
    Posts:1
  • Wikipedia works and at the same time does not work..
    My profs at the University used to say that any reference to Wikipedia in any paper you submit, will be considered a minus and crossed-out and I think they are right about it. It is a good idea to get a first glimpse at a problem by looking at the wiki, but for more information, one should consider standard references and books.

    However, an entire unnoticed problem is bias in the wikipedia. It is not so much about factual errors, but rather the supremacy of political belief systems. While this is not a big deal in the US wiki, it is in Europe. I have seen that socialist content doesnt allow any criticism on their pages, while they censor anything that goes beyond their political scheme. This might be a big problem in the future and is why I abstain from using any social science pages from the Wiki.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Max)
    12/18/2005
    Posts:1
  • Wikipedia  accuracy
    It seems to me that Wikipedia is only slightly different than any other media source in history (newspapers, TV, etc.).  There is always bias, either cultural or intentional.  The difference discussed here is the transient nature of the information, so if referencing a hard copy should always be made, particularly noting specific date and time of the Wikipedia image.  Does Wikipedia have a CM system so that, if necessary, the history canbe rebuilt?
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Andy)
    12/19/2005
    Posts:1

Log In

Forgot your password?     Register »
Advertisement

Videos

Laser-Triggered Chemical Reactions
Featured Content
Sponsored by:
White Papers

Twelve ways to reduce costs with SQL Server 2008
Find out how to reduce costs and get more efficient

Download

Total Economic Impact of SQL Server 2008 Upgrade
Forrester reports on increasing productivity and management capabilities

Download 

Achieving Cost and Resource Savings with UC
How Office Communications Server R2 and Exchange Server can make your business smarter and more efficient

Download 

The Compelling Case for Conferencing
Read how you can improve workload support and find IT efficiencies

Download

How Windows Server 2008 R2 Helps Optimize IT and Save you Money
Read how you can improve workload support and find IT efficiencies

Download

Windows Server 2008 R2 Hyper-V Live Migration
See how Windows Server 2008 R2 and Hyper-V enable virtualization and Live Migration

Download
Advertisement
Subscribe to Technology Review's daily e-mail update. Enter your e-mail address

TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES
Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology © 2009 Technology Review. All Rights Reserved.