Wikipedia in the media |
---|
Wikipedia as a topic |
Wikipedia as a source |
This page is for blogs where Wikipedia is discussed. Merely using Wikipedia as a source is not sufficient. These are not considered reliable sources.
However, nearly 20 years later, I am happy to admit that, for the most part, I was (mostly) mistaken in that many of the topics near and dear to my heart, particularly related to science and alternative medicine, have been covered on Wikipedia much more accurately than I had expected.
Apparently, what happened was, someone (presumably one of my readers) tried to add a reference to one of my essays to Wikipedia's Identity Politics page. The Ministry of Wiki-Truth objected, adamantly.
Polish readers will be upset with these words. But Wikipedia does not lie. And these very words are still preserved in documents now in Polish possession.
Wikipedia has an earnest, almost touching commitment to "the common people". And as we learned the hard way less than a century ago, "the common people" are overwhelmingly unsympathetic to Jews.
And Wikipedia's assumption—that by reviewing and regurgitating unbiased source material, a swarm of individual editors can approximate something resembling the truth—works just fine for, say, scraping demographic data or summarizing a book. It is less effective when applied to a made-up concept, propelled by a politicized generational divide.
Wikipedia, correctly, is not one to give in to such trollish bullying. It turned around and went to court asking for declaratory judgment that it does not infringe on the patents that WordLogic was waving around.
In this episode of Lawfare's Arbiters of Truth series on disinformation, Evelyn Douek and Quinta Jurecic spoke with Ryan Merkley, the chief of staff to the executive director of the Wikimedia Foundation.
To learn more about the development of Sakizaya Wikipedia and the digital activism efforts behind it, Rising Voices reached out to Lami Tsai-Wei Hung, one of the active editors of the Wikipedia and a PhD scholar in the Department of Ethnic Relations and Cultures at the National Dong Hwa University in Taiwan.
Their main article on intelligent design begins with a sentence including no fewer than three lies. Attempts to clean things up are reversed in minutes by "editors" on alert 24/7 who have nothing else to do with their time.
However, getting a Wikipedia page is tricky. And I'm putting it mildly. ... In this guide, you'll learn how to create a Wikipedia page from start-to-finish, and how to stand the best chance of getting it approved long-term:
With that in mind, it's come to FT Alphaville's attention recently that some Wikipedia users — two in particular — have been repeatedly editing Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse's Wikipedia page to remove some less positive aspects of the entry.
In late 2015, the Wikimedia Foundation, which runs Wikipedia, announced an artificial intelligence tool, called ORES (Objective Revision Evaluation Service) which they hoped might be useful to effectively pre-score edits for the various volunteer editors so they could catch vandalism quicker.
Rebecca interviews Rosie Stephenson Goodknight , Wikipedian of the year 2016.
The latest scam we've heard of comes to us from photographer Kyle Cassidy, who posted this wonderful photo of NPR host Peter Sagal running to Wikimedia Commons under a CC BY-SA 3.0 (attribution, sharealike) license:
So on the 20th anniversary, OneZero asked the individuals who made Wikipedia what it is today how it all started.
In order to contribute to a more inclusive history, the Flanders Architecture Institute through its Wiki Women Design initiative wants to break this circle, by unlocking the contributions of female designers on Wikipedia.
It is high time we moved the relationship between academia and the world's premier reference work to the next level. For that to happen, university administrators need to do their part and actively encourage faculty to contribute to it, via positive promotion reviews and financial bonuses.
Despite the craziness you might find on there, Wikipedia has a lot of interesting and useful information, but can you really believe what you read on Wikipedia? The main concern is that anyone can edit Wikipedia, thus resulting in vandalism and complete nonsense. However, that's not exactly true.
Adult entertainment company The Score Group has asked Google to remove dozens of Wikipedia entries from its search results. Some of these pages document the history of popular pirate sites. However, the DMCA notice also targets Wikipedia's own Wikipedia entry, as well as those of TorrentFreak, Netflix, Reddit, The Gutenberg Project, and many others.
The choice of information and even how things are phrased often have considerable social, economic or political importance. No surprise, then, that there is a struggle taking place over what Wikipedia should say is happening in the contested space of Hong Kong.
Of course, moderators play a critical role in Wikipedia's approach, helping to ensure entries don't fall victim to a 'too many cooks' scenario, or get filled with inaccurate misinformation by rogue contributors. The same principles can be applied to business transformation and process improvement.
Search engines need Wikipedia to enrich their results pages, and Wikipedia needs search engines to drive traffic to its pages and to disseminate the information that it has to offer. Both parties help each other out quite a bit.
We provide a wide range of Custom Wikipedia page development services to help you get recognized quickly. We can quickly get you to the top of the charts by creating a well-versed wiki page for you and your platform. We can guarantee the greatest Wikipedia page writing services with the fantastic help of our top Wikipedia Page creators.
A few days later, one user, who had corrected it quite bluntly and a bit angrily pointed it out as a mistake in the commentary of the page's version history with the comment: "What the heck is that supposed to mean?" The reaction was understandable, but simultaneously, kind of a scary first encounter with the community. Thanks for correcting it though. A bit later, another user wrote a few more elaborate and friendly messages to us on our personal user page, explaining our misdeed while simultaneously pointing out that it was not a big issue.
Wikimedia's Chris Koerner interviews Annie Rauwerda, whose encyclopedic knowledge of the encyclopedia means she finds (and shares) the most wild, offbeat and fascinating articles.
Having experienced Wikipedia's corruption live, Mike wants to now stand up for himself and the community to spread awareness and fight for justice. How many other stories have been buried and suppressed by Wikipedia for differences in political views? It's time for answers.
To understand what that means for Wikipedia and its related projects, it's helpful to briefly explain how content moderation on Wikipedia works. Unlike other platforms with centralized and at least partially automated content moderation practices, the Wikimedia Foundation does not set editorial policy for Wikipedia or any other Wikimedia sites.
Why do these Wikipedia wars matter? For one thing, they matter enough to Russian-sympathetic trolls that they spend time and energy modifying thousands of articles. But they also matter because Wikipedia is one of the leading informational authorities on the internet; millions and millions of users scroll through Wikipedia each day and it's a website that's become incredibly trusted among users. So, the edit wars aren't just minor quibbles but, instead, are a part of a dangerous game. The information seen on Wikipedia shapes people's perceptions of the truth.
The first rule of editing a Wikipedia page is NOT to edit a Wikipedia page. But seriously, don't.
Chinese Wikipedia had a robust collection of detailed and authoritative articles on medieval Russia, thanks to a user called Zhemao ... until it was revealed that she'd pulled off one of the largest hoaxes ever seen on the platform.
Who Wrote That? is powered by WikiWho, a platform that parses texts to reveal " who wrote and/or removed and/or reinserted which exact text at token level at what revision". The extension is compatible with most modern browsers.
Most people are unaware of the crucial role of fungi, of their stunning diversity, and of their incredible range of applications. This seems to be reflected on Wikipedia as well, where Wikipedians in the WikiProject Fungi are working to better organize information in articles related to fungi.
Anyway, it's possible this means that Wikipedia can no longer stop people from adding more and more content (true or not) to Judge Andy Oldham's profile, because having users take it down would potentially violate the law (but don't do that: vandalizing Wikipedia is always bad, even if you're trying to make a point).
While academic libraries and Wikipedia have many differences, they have a unified purpose: to promote access to information. Many Wikipedia pages summarize, cite, and curate scholarly information in an accessible format. Students, professors, judges, and junior physicians consult Wikipedia frequently. They also consult the footnotes on Wikipedia pages.
Incredibly, most of these claims about "MacMasters" (spoiler alert; there was no such scientist) were sourced to publications that Wikipedia deemed acceptable, and not questioned for years by any of Wikipedia's (usually diligent) editors.
By now, it should be clear that anyone can edit Wikipedia; there are so many different kinds of tasks up for grabs that you're basically guaranteed to find something you like and are good at.
To understand why Wikipedia is horrifically inaccurate and/or misleading about paranormal topics and holistic medicine, you need to understand the connection between the editors and the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI).
Wikipedia is suggesting users to use browser extensions to customize their user experience. A few add-ons have popped up which offer an easy way to restore Wikipedia's legacy look. These are of course made by third-parties, indie developers.
While the foundation is responsible for the site's upkeep, it's also the front bulwark against any legal threat to its volunteers. Roberts said most lawsuits against Wikipedia get squashed soon after they're filed, thanks to 230. Without that protection, costly lawsuits could drag on much longer, which opens up the possibility some neerdowell with an agenda could threaten a lengthy court battle in order to antagonize Wikipedia or an editor into changing or removing content on the site.
This is (apparently) a great war simmering between Wikipedia editors and cryptid hunters. Cryptid enthusiasts, such as those who haunt r/Cryptozoology, accuse the open-source information website of being biased against their beloved beasts, dismissing such things as Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster with pejorative descriptors of "pseudoscience" (Or, worse — "folklore").
Regions like Europe portrayed obsession with the term bureaucracy. For instance, the UK was obsessed with devolving, while the Netherlands was obsessed with insurance. Similarly, Danish users loved tax while Finland likes saunas and Iceland adores eruptions.
Whether you need help researching sources or just want someone to write the content for you, any one of these organizations will be able to assist in getting your page up and running quickly and efficiently. So, if you're looking for an easy way to get on Wikipedia without having to worry about all the details involved in writing a page yourself, look no further than these top-notch Wiki creation agencies!
She goes on to show her favourite CA Gov Wikipedia edit to date, which comedically, was some government employee "correcting the French grammar of the season seven of Riverdale Wikipedia article."
The takedown request wants a Wikipedia page removed from Google's search results because it talks about YouTube rippers, and offers a detailed comparison of them. Links to the software are incidental, appearing only at the foot of the page as references. The demand that Google should de-list links to the page in its search results is a thinly disguised but dangerous attack on knowledge.
The result of women not editing Wikipedia is that women don't get written about, even though women and men use Wikipedia at the same rate. Also, when women do get written about the entries end up looking like mine: The topics the editors left were my miscarriage and my naked picture documenting domestic violence. And now, in the background, men are debating if those leftover topics are significant enough for me to have my own page.
"One global license" and "curable conconformance" might not be the most exciting thing you've ever read about or on Wikipedia/Wikimedia, but this is lovely news for people who have to think about licenses.
It is up to you, as the backbone of the Enhanced Movement, to ensure that Wikipedia uses enhanced inclusive language when discussing performance therapies, and the use of performance enhancements by professional athletes.
Having a Wikipedia page can significantly benefit artists and bands. The website serves as a platform to showcase your talents, provide accurate information to fans, and establish powerful online credibility in the industry.
we're calling on the Trove Community to add links to your Trove discoveries to the relevant articles in Wikipedia...Currently there are over 18,200 links to Trove in English Wikipedia – each diligently added by a member of the Trove community to share their research discoveries.
As of writing, there are over 11,100 categories for data – called properties – in Wikidata, and over 105 million entries, for people and many other subjects (called items). And from the little I've seen so far, although there are errors, of course, it's pretty good quality.
This research is carried out Yasseri in order to understand what topics garnered the most attention collective. Without further ado, below, we present the list of the most viewed articles in Wikipedia in English in 2022.
In this article, we harness the powerful combination of LLM agents, tools, and function calling to extract data from Wikipedia readily.
Unlike some other top websites, Wikipedia does not rely on government funding. It is run as a non-profit and operates on the philanthropic contributions made by individuals and organizations. This approach allows Wikipedia to maintain its independence and impartiality in the information it provides.
Martin Korner and Tatiana Sennikova, from the University of Koblenz-Landau in Germany, made a tool to compare how Wikipedia pages about the same topic but in a different language might be influenced by different sources.
The Sun have tracked the IP addresses of Wikipedia edits on prominent MSPs' pages and found them to have come from – you guessed it – Holyrood work computers. Staffers' time is clearly being put to good use…
From a million images from Google and Wikipedia searches, it shows February 13 in Nature that the portrait of 3,500 trades and professions is based on stereotypes.
Wikipedia has been playing a major role in 'dumbing down' the current and next generation of our youth. Its potentially playing a major role in destroying diversity of opinion. This goes someway to explaining community attitudes on issues like climate change today. The damage is been done now.
Wikipedia in the media |
---|
Wikipedia as a topic |
Wikipedia as a source |
This page is for blogs where Wikipedia is discussed. Merely using Wikipedia as a source is not sufficient. These are not considered reliable sources.
However, nearly 20 years later, I am happy to admit that, for the most part, I was (mostly) mistaken in that many of the topics near and dear to my heart, particularly related to science and alternative medicine, have been covered on Wikipedia much more accurately than I had expected.
Apparently, what happened was, someone (presumably one of my readers) tried to add a reference to one of my essays to Wikipedia's Identity Politics page. The Ministry of Wiki-Truth objected, adamantly.
Polish readers will be upset with these words. But Wikipedia does not lie. And these very words are still preserved in documents now in Polish possession.
Wikipedia has an earnest, almost touching commitment to "the common people". And as we learned the hard way less than a century ago, "the common people" are overwhelmingly unsympathetic to Jews.
And Wikipedia's assumption—that by reviewing and regurgitating unbiased source material, a swarm of individual editors can approximate something resembling the truth—works just fine for, say, scraping demographic data or summarizing a book. It is less effective when applied to a made-up concept, propelled by a politicized generational divide.
Wikipedia, correctly, is not one to give in to such trollish bullying. It turned around and went to court asking for declaratory judgment that it does not infringe on the patents that WordLogic was waving around.
In this episode of Lawfare's Arbiters of Truth series on disinformation, Evelyn Douek and Quinta Jurecic spoke with Ryan Merkley, the chief of staff to the executive director of the Wikimedia Foundation.
To learn more about the development of Sakizaya Wikipedia and the digital activism efforts behind it, Rising Voices reached out to Lami Tsai-Wei Hung, one of the active editors of the Wikipedia and a PhD scholar in the Department of Ethnic Relations and Cultures at the National Dong Hwa University in Taiwan.
Their main article on intelligent design begins with a sentence including no fewer than three lies. Attempts to clean things up are reversed in minutes by "editors" on alert 24/7 who have nothing else to do with their time.
However, getting a Wikipedia page is tricky. And I'm putting it mildly. ... In this guide, you'll learn how to create a Wikipedia page from start-to-finish, and how to stand the best chance of getting it approved long-term:
With that in mind, it's come to FT Alphaville's attention recently that some Wikipedia users — two in particular — have been repeatedly editing Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse's Wikipedia page to remove some less positive aspects of the entry.
In late 2015, the Wikimedia Foundation, which runs Wikipedia, announced an artificial intelligence tool, called ORES (Objective Revision Evaluation Service) which they hoped might be useful to effectively pre-score edits for the various volunteer editors so they could catch vandalism quicker.
Rebecca interviews Rosie Stephenson Goodknight , Wikipedian of the year 2016.
The latest scam we've heard of comes to us from photographer Kyle Cassidy, who posted this wonderful photo of NPR host Peter Sagal running to Wikimedia Commons under a CC BY-SA 3.0 (attribution, sharealike) license:
So on the 20th anniversary, OneZero asked the individuals who made Wikipedia what it is today how it all started.
In order to contribute to a more inclusive history, the Flanders Architecture Institute through its Wiki Women Design initiative wants to break this circle, by unlocking the contributions of female designers on Wikipedia.
It is high time we moved the relationship between academia and the world's premier reference work to the next level. For that to happen, university administrators need to do their part and actively encourage faculty to contribute to it, via positive promotion reviews and financial bonuses.
Despite the craziness you might find on there, Wikipedia has a lot of interesting and useful information, but can you really believe what you read on Wikipedia? The main concern is that anyone can edit Wikipedia, thus resulting in vandalism and complete nonsense. However, that's not exactly true.
Adult entertainment company The Score Group has asked Google to remove dozens of Wikipedia entries from its search results. Some of these pages document the history of popular pirate sites. However, the DMCA notice also targets Wikipedia's own Wikipedia entry, as well as those of TorrentFreak, Netflix, Reddit, The Gutenberg Project, and many others.
The choice of information and even how things are phrased often have considerable social, economic or political importance. No surprise, then, that there is a struggle taking place over what Wikipedia should say is happening in the contested space of Hong Kong.
Of course, moderators play a critical role in Wikipedia's approach, helping to ensure entries don't fall victim to a 'too many cooks' scenario, or get filled with inaccurate misinformation by rogue contributors. The same principles can be applied to business transformation and process improvement.
Search engines need Wikipedia to enrich their results pages, and Wikipedia needs search engines to drive traffic to its pages and to disseminate the information that it has to offer. Both parties help each other out quite a bit.
We provide a wide range of Custom Wikipedia page development services to help you get recognized quickly. We can quickly get you to the top of the charts by creating a well-versed wiki page for you and your platform. We can guarantee the greatest Wikipedia page writing services with the fantastic help of our top Wikipedia Page creators.
A few days later, one user, who had corrected it quite bluntly and a bit angrily pointed it out as a mistake in the commentary of the page's version history with the comment: "What the heck is that supposed to mean?" The reaction was understandable, but simultaneously, kind of a scary first encounter with the community. Thanks for correcting it though. A bit later, another user wrote a few more elaborate and friendly messages to us on our personal user page, explaining our misdeed while simultaneously pointing out that it was not a big issue.
Wikimedia's Chris Koerner interviews Annie Rauwerda, whose encyclopedic knowledge of the encyclopedia means she finds (and shares) the most wild, offbeat and fascinating articles.
Having experienced Wikipedia's corruption live, Mike wants to now stand up for himself and the community to spread awareness and fight for justice. How many other stories have been buried and suppressed by Wikipedia for differences in political views? It's time for answers.
To understand what that means for Wikipedia and its related projects, it's helpful to briefly explain how content moderation on Wikipedia works. Unlike other platforms with centralized and at least partially automated content moderation practices, the Wikimedia Foundation does not set editorial policy for Wikipedia or any other Wikimedia sites.
Why do these Wikipedia wars matter? For one thing, they matter enough to Russian-sympathetic trolls that they spend time and energy modifying thousands of articles. But they also matter because Wikipedia is one of the leading informational authorities on the internet; millions and millions of users scroll through Wikipedia each day and it's a website that's become incredibly trusted among users. So, the edit wars aren't just minor quibbles but, instead, are a part of a dangerous game. The information seen on Wikipedia shapes people's perceptions of the truth.
The first rule of editing a Wikipedia page is NOT to edit a Wikipedia page. But seriously, don't.
Chinese Wikipedia had a robust collection of detailed and authoritative articles on medieval Russia, thanks to a user called Zhemao ... until it was revealed that she'd pulled off one of the largest hoaxes ever seen on the platform.
Who Wrote That? is powered by WikiWho, a platform that parses texts to reveal " who wrote and/or removed and/or reinserted which exact text at token level at what revision". The extension is compatible with most modern browsers.
Most people are unaware of the crucial role of fungi, of their stunning diversity, and of their incredible range of applications. This seems to be reflected on Wikipedia as well, where Wikipedians in the WikiProject Fungi are working to better organize information in articles related to fungi.
Anyway, it's possible this means that Wikipedia can no longer stop people from adding more and more content (true or not) to Judge Andy Oldham's profile, because having users take it down would potentially violate the law (but don't do that: vandalizing Wikipedia is always bad, even if you're trying to make a point).
While academic libraries and Wikipedia have many differences, they have a unified purpose: to promote access to information. Many Wikipedia pages summarize, cite, and curate scholarly information in an accessible format. Students, professors, judges, and junior physicians consult Wikipedia frequently. They also consult the footnotes on Wikipedia pages.
Incredibly, most of these claims about "MacMasters" (spoiler alert; there was no such scientist) were sourced to publications that Wikipedia deemed acceptable, and not questioned for years by any of Wikipedia's (usually diligent) editors.
By now, it should be clear that anyone can edit Wikipedia; there are so many different kinds of tasks up for grabs that you're basically guaranteed to find something you like and are good at.
To understand why Wikipedia is horrifically inaccurate and/or misleading about paranormal topics and holistic medicine, you need to understand the connection between the editors and the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI).
Wikipedia is suggesting users to use browser extensions to customize their user experience. A few add-ons have popped up which offer an easy way to restore Wikipedia's legacy look. These are of course made by third-parties, indie developers.
While the foundation is responsible for the site's upkeep, it's also the front bulwark against any legal threat to its volunteers. Roberts said most lawsuits against Wikipedia get squashed soon after they're filed, thanks to 230. Without that protection, costly lawsuits could drag on much longer, which opens up the possibility some neerdowell with an agenda could threaten a lengthy court battle in order to antagonize Wikipedia or an editor into changing or removing content on the site.
This is (apparently) a great war simmering between Wikipedia editors and cryptid hunters. Cryptid enthusiasts, such as those who haunt r/Cryptozoology, accuse the open-source information website of being biased against their beloved beasts, dismissing such things as Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster with pejorative descriptors of "pseudoscience" (Or, worse — "folklore").
Regions like Europe portrayed obsession with the term bureaucracy. For instance, the UK was obsessed with devolving, while the Netherlands was obsessed with insurance. Similarly, Danish users loved tax while Finland likes saunas and Iceland adores eruptions.
Whether you need help researching sources or just want someone to write the content for you, any one of these organizations will be able to assist in getting your page up and running quickly and efficiently. So, if you're looking for an easy way to get on Wikipedia without having to worry about all the details involved in writing a page yourself, look no further than these top-notch Wiki creation agencies!
She goes on to show her favourite CA Gov Wikipedia edit to date, which comedically, was some government employee "correcting the French grammar of the season seven of Riverdale Wikipedia article."
The takedown request wants a Wikipedia page removed from Google's search results because it talks about YouTube rippers, and offers a detailed comparison of them. Links to the software are incidental, appearing only at the foot of the page as references. The demand that Google should de-list links to the page in its search results is a thinly disguised but dangerous attack on knowledge.
The result of women not editing Wikipedia is that women don't get written about, even though women and men use Wikipedia at the same rate. Also, when women do get written about the entries end up looking like mine: The topics the editors left were my miscarriage and my naked picture documenting domestic violence. And now, in the background, men are debating if those leftover topics are significant enough for me to have my own page.
"One global license" and "curable conconformance" might not be the most exciting thing you've ever read about or on Wikipedia/Wikimedia, but this is lovely news for people who have to think about licenses.
It is up to you, as the backbone of the Enhanced Movement, to ensure that Wikipedia uses enhanced inclusive language when discussing performance therapies, and the use of performance enhancements by professional athletes.
Having a Wikipedia page can significantly benefit artists and bands. The website serves as a platform to showcase your talents, provide accurate information to fans, and establish powerful online credibility in the industry.
we're calling on the Trove Community to add links to your Trove discoveries to the relevant articles in Wikipedia...Currently there are over 18,200 links to Trove in English Wikipedia – each diligently added by a member of the Trove community to share their research discoveries.
As of writing, there are over 11,100 categories for data – called properties – in Wikidata, and over 105 million entries, for people and many other subjects (called items). And from the little I've seen so far, although there are errors, of course, it's pretty good quality.
This research is carried out Yasseri in order to understand what topics garnered the most attention collective. Without further ado, below, we present the list of the most viewed articles in Wikipedia in English in 2022.
In this article, we harness the powerful combination of LLM agents, tools, and function calling to extract data from Wikipedia readily.
Unlike some other top websites, Wikipedia does not rely on government funding. It is run as a non-profit and operates on the philanthropic contributions made by individuals and organizations. This approach allows Wikipedia to maintain its independence and impartiality in the information it provides.
Martin Korner and Tatiana Sennikova, from the University of Koblenz-Landau in Germany, made a tool to compare how Wikipedia pages about the same topic but in a different language might be influenced by different sources.
The Sun have tracked the IP addresses of Wikipedia edits on prominent MSPs' pages and found them to have come from – you guessed it – Holyrood work computers. Staffers' time is clearly being put to good use…
From a million images from Google and Wikipedia searches, it shows February 13 in Nature that the portrait of 3,500 trades and professions is based on stereotypes.
Wikipedia has been playing a major role in 'dumbing down' the current and next generation of our youth. Its potentially playing a major role in destroying diversity of opinion. This goes someway to explaining community attitudes on issues like climate change today. The damage is been done now.