Wikipedia To Tighten Editorial Control

from the wiki-wiki-wiki dept

Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales says the online encyclopedia is deciding how to implement stricter controls over some of its content, including freezing "stable" pages and limiting editing access to certain controversial articles. While the Wikipedia community tends to remove vandalism on popular pages quite quickly, Wales is concerned that the fact that it appears there, even briefly, means "whoever opens the article at this moment will get annoyed -- and therefore doubt our credibility". Wikipedia's reliability and credibility has come under attack numerous times from people for whom its accountability to the community isn't as trustworthy as a commercial encyclopedia's assumed authority. Indeed, Wales says setting up a commission to decide which pages should be frozen is one possibility, something many Wikipedia users and contributors may not like. Wikipedia already has a number of checks and balances for contentious entries, including the ability for admins to protect pages and prevent them from being edited. The changes Wales is suggesting sound like deciding certain pages are finished and complete rather than deciding they need to be protected from vandalism. But that could simply create more problems: it's easy to not take a fight over content seriously when somebody knows they can be a part of ongoing changes to it; but if they're presented with the possibility that something they don't agree with may be enshrined in virtual wiki stone, unable to be edited, the fight will probably become much more intense. Any effort to enhance Wikipedia's credibility with the outside world must toe a fine line and not alienate its community by becoming a source controlled by a select few -- the opposite of the ideology upon which it's based.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    dorpus, 5 Aug 2005 @ 2:32pm

    So in other words

    They are exactly like encyclopedias of the old days. Who was it that said they are going out of business?

    link to this | view in thread ]

  2. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 5 Aug 2005 @ 3:29pm

    Creating Knowledge


    I may disagree with your opinion, but I defend your right to say it!
    Without this truth, human knowledge will be stifled.

    The phone, light bulk, the airplane, splitting the atom (the atom bomb) were all "impossible" - until they were made!
    Locking Wiki pages will I think delay good ideas and society will bepoorer.

    Perhaps there should could be a message on contentious views inviting experiments to resolve disputes.
    Disputes are solved with more information - let's ask for it.

    Perhaps the solution is to encourage and invite experiments to help
    clarify the issues. i.e. propose a new experiment to demonstrate a point and provide more data.

    Is this not "the scientific method"?

    The Wiki is a great tool and most of the material is excellent.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  3. identicon
    Ivan Sick, 6 Aug 2005 @ 11:48am

    Re: So in other words

    In a perfect world, maybe. Unfortunately articles frequently get edited with malicious intent. This isn't closing an open system, it's called quality control.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  4. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 6 Aug 2005 @ 12:48pm

    Re: So in other words

    Yeah, right. How about this for double speak too: This is isn't closing an open system, it's just unopening and unclosed system.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  5. identicon
    Bob, 7 Aug 2005 @ 12:19am

    Community

    I agree with the poster who mentioned about quality control.

    When you allow access to everyone, then you also unfortunately allow it for those bozos who would seek to ruin things either out of malice, mischeviousness or any other reason they would have to vandalize a page. It is an act against the work of the community.

    Freezing pages and restricting edits gives control back to the community, and minimizes any rogue elements that would seek to discredit the content for their own self-interest.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  6. identicon
    Colum, 9 Aug 2005 @ 8:22am

    Re: Community

    Though this raises the obvious question of who descides who is a bozo. Surely requiring that a person be logged in to edit some pages might work and if they vandalise then their account can be locked or punished in some way. Or possibly locking down really bad users by IP address. Again, the mechanism for jury selection for this would need to be well chosen to prevent the pettiness of bureacracy and ignorance of censor creeping in

    The real beauty of Wiki is that it is dynamic and not locked. New references and information come along all the time.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  7. identicon
    Ivan Sick, 11 Aug 2005 @ 4:45pm

    Re: Community

    I agree that it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to implement such an endeavor properly. But it's not a bad thing for a wiki webmaster to ponder. Well, the whole issue is moot now.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  8. identicon
    Ivan Sick, 11 Aug 2005 @ 4:53pm

    Re: So in other words

    Oh, and come off it. I don't approve of doublespeak, look at my ID frpetessake. The idea (again, if it were actually happening) is to combat malicious editing. First example that springs to mind: [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Internet_Explorer#More_concerns_about_possible_anti-IE_POV[ /URL] "I protected the page because of all the vandalism lately. Redwolf24 21:41, 25 July 2005"

    link to this | view in thread ]


Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.