Very glad to see this:
Wikipedia to Add Editorial Review of Some Changes - NYTimes.com
By NOAM COHEN
Published: August 24, 2009
Wikipedia, one of the 10 most popular sites on the Web, was founded about eight years ago as a long-shot experiment to create a free encyclopedia from the contributions of volunteers, all with the power to edit, and presumably improve, the content.
Now, as the English-language version of Wikipedia has just surpassed three million articles, that freewheeling ethos is about to be curbed.
Officials at the Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit in San Francisco that governs Wikipedia, say that within weeks, the English-language Wikipedia will begin imposing a layer of editorial review on articles about living people.
Shared via AddThis
Showing posts with label Wikipedia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Wikipedia. Show all posts
Monday, August 24, 2009
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Hurry Up, Trend!
I am always a bit suspicious of the little trend stories offered up by the news weeklies. But here's to wishful thinking and hoping Newsweek is right this time.
The individual user has been king on the Internet, but the pendulum seems to be swinging back toward edited information vetted by professionals.
By any name, the current incarnation of the Internet is known for giving power to the people. Sites like YouTube and Wikipedia collect the creations of unpaid amateurs while kicking pros to the curb—or at least deflating their stature to that of the ordinary Netizen. But now some of the same entrepreneurs that funded the user-generated revolution are paying professionals to edit and produce online content.
In short, the expert is back. The revival comes amid mounting demand for a more reliable, bankable Web. "People are beginning to recognize that the world is too dangerous a place for faulty information," says Charlotte Beal, a consumer strategist for the Minneapolis-based research firm Iconoculture. Beal adds that choice fatigue and fear of bad advice are creating a "perfect storm of demand for expert information."
Which seems to be even more important given these kinds of allegations:
Revenge of the Experts
The individual user has been king on the Internet, but the pendulum seems to be swinging back toward edited information vetted by professionals.
By any name, the current incarnation of the Internet is known for giving power to the people. Sites like YouTube and Wikipedia collect the creations of unpaid amateurs while kicking pros to the curb—or at least deflating their stature to that of the ordinary Netizen. But now some of the same entrepreneurs that funded the user-generated revolution are paying professionals to edit and produce online content.
In short, the expert is back. The revival comes amid mounting demand for a more reliable, bankable Web. "People are beginning to recognize that the world is too dangerous a place for faulty information," says Charlotte Beal, a consumer strategist for the Minneapolis-based research firm Iconoculture. Beal adds that choice fatigue and fear of bad advice are creating a "perfect storm of demand for expert information."
Which seems to be even more important given these kinds of allegations:
The toughest two weeks of Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales's career just became a whole lot worse, with a former chief scientist at one of the world's biggest technology companies claiming Wales traded Wiki edits for donations.
Jeff Merkey, a former computer scientist at Novell, claims Wales told him in 2006 that in exchange for a substantial donation from Merkey, he would edit his uncomplimentary Wikipedia entry to make it more favourable.
Merkey made a $US5000 ($5455) donation in 2006 and the edit history for his Wikipedia entry showed that, around the same time, Wales personally made changes to the entry after wiping it out completely and ordering editors to start over.
Merkey's claims were published in a statement on a Wikipedia mailing list. On the same mailing list, Wales called the allegation "nonsense".
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Wikipedia Tries Vetting
This was overdue. Democratic projects are fine, but facts aren't democratic. Wikipedia is a grand concept in need of some serious rethinking. It can, for example, add dozens of editors willing to work for nothing but interested in supporting the idea. But the present course is ridiculous. Celebrity A dies; detractors rush in to impugn him; fans turn up to defend and exaggerate his successes.
This will start in Germany but I hope it spreads soon. Wikipedia Faces the Facts
It might be visited by 7 per cent of internet users every day, and have helped to win many a pub quiz, but Wikipedia is still hampered by its inability to guarantee that information appearing on the website is true.
To rectify this the online encyclopaedia is to tackle its reliability problem with a package designed to improve its trustworthiness and reliability.
The German-language version is to pioneer the first and potentially most controversial change, by which ordinary readers will lose their ability to alter any entry and see their changes appear instantly on the screen, New Scientist reports today.
Instead, instant editing will be restricted to a group of “trusted editors”, who must first earn their status by proving their commitment to the Wikipedia concept. One proposal is to limit trusted status to those who have made 30 reliable edits in 30 days. Ordinary users will still be able to propose changes, but these will have to be vetted by a trusted editor before they appear. The English-language version will retain instant editing for now.
This will start in Germany but I hope it spreads soon. Wikipedia Faces the Facts
It might be visited by 7 per cent of internet users every day, and have helped to win many a pub quiz, but Wikipedia is still hampered by its inability to guarantee that information appearing on the website is true.
To rectify this the online encyclopaedia is to tackle its reliability problem with a package designed to improve its trustworthiness and reliability.
The German-language version is to pioneer the first and potentially most controversial change, by which ordinary readers will lose their ability to alter any entry and see their changes appear instantly on the screen, New Scientist reports today.
Instead, instant editing will be restricted to a group of “trusted editors”, who must first earn their status by proving their commitment to the Wikipedia concept. One proposal is to limit trusted status to those who have made 30 reliable edits in 30 days. Ordinary users will still be able to propose changes, but these will have to be vetted by a trusted editor before they appear. The English-language version will retain instant editing for now.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Wikipedia Editing Tracked UPDATED
Wikipedia 'shows CIA page edits'
The tool detected changes to a page about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
By Jonathan Fildes
BBC News
An online tool that claims to reveal the identity of organisations that edit Wikipedia pages has revealed that the CIA was involved in editing entries.
Wikipedia Scanner allegedly shows that workers on the agency's computers made edits to the page of Iran's president.
It also purportedly shows that the Vatican has edited entries about Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams.
The tool, developed by US researchers, trawls a list of 5.3m edits and matches them to the net address of the editor.
Wikipedia is a free online encyclopaedia that can be created and edited by anyone.
... The site also indicates that a computer owned by the US Democratic Party was used to make changes to the site of right-wing talk show host Rush Limbaugh.
UPDATE at 11:45 a.m.: Fox News got into the act, too.
Here's one little bit:
...You'll find changes that were made by IP address 12.167.224.228, which resolves to Fox News. Changes are to the articles “Keith Olbermann”, “Chris Wallace”, “Carl Cameron”, “Brit Hume”, “Shepard Smith”, “Al Franken”, “Brian Wilson”, “CNN”, and “Greta Van Susteren”.
And from chatmag.com:
In the latest news regarding the growing controversy over the Dateline NBC series, "To Catch a Predator", the vigilante group NBC employs to facilitate the stings has suffered yet another setback.
Founder of Perverted-Justice.com Phillip Eide, aka XavierVE on Wikipedia, has been indefinitely blocked from posting edits within Wikipedia.
Since the first posting of the Wikipedia article regarding Perverted-Justice.com, Eide has repeatedly posted what can only be described as "flaming" posts; deleted other posts critical to Perverted-Justice.com, and when taken to task, replied with more invectives.
And
Cast Your Vote On The Wikipedia Editing Wall Of Shame
By Scott Gilbertson
Threat Level is running a poll where you can track and vote on the most shameful and/or disturbing Wikipedia edits found with Virgil Griffith’s new Wikipedia search tool. For those that missed the story, Griffith created a tool that unmasks the anonymous edits made to Wikipedia pages.
The tool detected changes to a page about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
By Jonathan Fildes
BBC News
An online tool that claims to reveal the identity of organisations that edit Wikipedia pages has revealed that the CIA was involved in editing entries.
Wikipedia Scanner allegedly shows that workers on the agency's computers made edits to the page of Iran's president.
It also purportedly shows that the Vatican has edited entries about Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams.
The tool, developed by US researchers, trawls a list of 5.3m edits and matches them to the net address of the editor.
Wikipedia is a free online encyclopaedia that can be created and edited by anyone.
... The site also indicates that a computer owned by the US Democratic Party was used to make changes to the site of right-wing talk show host Rush Limbaugh.
UPDATE at 11:45 a.m.: Fox News got into the act, too.
Here's one little bit:
...You'll find changes that were made by IP address 12.167.224.228, which resolves to Fox News. Changes are to the articles “Keith Olbermann”, “Chris Wallace”, “Carl Cameron”, “Brit Hume”, “Shepard Smith”, “Al Franken”, “Brian Wilson”, “CNN”, and “Greta Van Susteren”.
And from chatmag.com:
In the latest news regarding the growing controversy over the Dateline NBC series, "To Catch a Predator", the vigilante group NBC employs to facilitate the stings has suffered yet another setback.
Founder of Perverted-Justice.com Phillip Eide, aka XavierVE on Wikipedia, has been indefinitely blocked from posting edits within Wikipedia.
Since the first posting of the Wikipedia article regarding Perverted-Justice.com, Eide has repeatedly posted what can only be described as "flaming" posts; deleted other posts critical to Perverted-Justice.com, and when taken to task, replied with more invectives.
And
Cast Your Vote On The Wikipedia Editing Wall Of Shame
By Scott Gilbertson
Threat Level is running a poll where you can track and vote on the most shameful and/or disturbing Wikipedia edits found with Virgil Griffith’s new Wikipedia search tool. For those that missed the story, Griffith created a tool that unmasks the anonymous edits made to Wikipedia pages.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)