the wikipedia review

It’s only a website… it’s only a website…

Wikipedia Scanner

with 6 comments

On 13 August 2007, Cal Tech computation and neural-systems graduate student Virgil Griffith released what he calls the “Wikipedia Scanner”, which is available over the web for all to see here.

When it was first released, a number of media outlets covered the story, considering the possible implications that such technology might bring. Some of the stories that were written include:

    News continues to break, so it might be a good idea to keep a look out on Google News to see if any more stories break in the meantime. It has also been discussed in a number of forums, including:

    It is interesting to note Wikipedia’s own coverage of this.

    This story has created a wave of new stories.  Most prominent of these is that Wired Blogs is running a user submission to allow people to submit their own stories, using the scanner, of where companies, using anonymous IPs, are adding false information that it is in their best interests to add.  And bear in mind that the scanner does not include anyone who has logged in and created an account (hence this represents less than 1% of all of this kind of activity).  To read the submissions and also add one if you have any, read below:

    Vote On the Most Shameful Wikipedia Spin Jobs

    Some of the most prominent submissions are as follows:

    Opinion seems to be divided on this one. Some people, such as Lamont Storm Star, pointed out that this tool could make it possible to stalk others. Others, such as Infoboy, suggested that it would help to make people accountable. Some, like Blissyu2 and Daniel Brandt, pointed out that it could be used in the wrong way to stalk innocent people whilst at the same time providing extra cover for people who are trying to hide what their doing, thus making accountability even worse.

    As with so many other things, only time will tell. Will this new product make Wikipedia more accountable or less? Will it make any difference at all?

    One thing is certain. All of the news reports highlight that Wikipedia is not to be trusted. We at Wikipedia Review have been saying this since we opened in October 2005. Are people finally starting to listen?

    UPDATE (16 August 2007):

    I’ve included the link to the Wired story that highlights examples of bad editing, and added a wealth of new stories, including Wikipedia’s coverage of the events.  This seems to be spiralling, at least in the mass media, yet is being covered less on the Wikipedia mailing list than the comparable SlimVirgin scandal.

    Share/Save/Bookmark

    Written by blissyu2

    August 15th, 2007 at 9:50 am

    Posted in Editors, Software, WikiEN-L

    « Wikia and Wikipedia — “unconnected”?
    Why was the Wikipedia Scanner created? »

    6 Responses to 'Wikipedia Scanner'

    Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'Wikipedia Scanner'.

    1. Great post, Blissy. Like you and Daniel Brandt, I have some reservations about this new tool; I really don’t know what to think of it yet.

      I think the story about the general inaccuracy and unreliablity of WP is already largely out there. The challenge will be in getting the mainstream media to notice and comment on the drama and dysfunction that lies behind the inaccuracy and unreliability.

      Cedric

      15 Aug 07 at 5:26 pm

    2. The thing that I have been noticing about these recent news items is that they are consistently referring to Wikipedia as “broken” or “corrupt” or “wrong” in some way, something that they weren’t consistently doing before. And whilst some of the news reports are from obscure sources, some of them are very much mainstream.

      It is kind of a gateway, to open their eyes up a little. For now, they are content to laugh and joke that the scanner doesn’t really expose anything more than petty vandalism, but then they might look around to say hey, wait on, perhaps there is something to these suggestions that Wikipedia is broken? Maybe we should look in to this?

      blissyu2

      15 Aug 07 at 10:57 pm

    3. Maybe the idea that WP is a propaganda tool has entered public consciousness, and not simply the “nerds”? Right now, I consider the scanner a pretty good thing. I don’t know what Jimbo has said about it yet, and I am very interested to hear his comments.

      EddieElastic

      16 Aug 07 at 3:59 pm

    4. I’ve noticed that the Wired Blogs is providing LOTS and LOTS of hits:

      http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/08/vote-on-the-top.html

      So I am going to update this blog entry to reflect that. It seems like this story is getting bigger and bigger every day. Is Wikipedia covering it up?

      blissyu2

      16 Aug 07 at 4:36 pm

    5. Actually, from what I can see, Wikipedia is not covering it. Virtually no mention in the mailing list, very little noise on-wiki. It seems like they think that it is out of their control, so they just watch the train wreck.

      blissyu2

      16 Aug 07 at 5:16 pm

    6. I’m honestly not sure why anyone would even attempt to play a game like this without a gamepad.

      Joi Turzak

      5 Mar 14 at 5:20 pm

    Leave a Reply