The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

> General Discussion? What's that all about?

This subforum is for general discussion of Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects. For a glossary of terms frequently used in such discussions, please refer to Wikipedia:Glossary. For a glossary of musical terms, see here. Other useful links:

Akahele.orgWikipedia-WatchWikitruthWP:ANWikiEN-L/Foundation-L (mailing lists) • Citizendium forums

2 Pages V  1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> List of Websites Critical of Wikipedia
Selina
post Tue 21st February 2006, 6:22pm
Post #1


Cat herder
******

Group: Staffy
Posts: 1,513
Joined: Sun 19th Feb 2006, 10:28pm
Member No.: 1

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Criticism of Wikipedia is often relegated to outside the system itself, due to the possibility of censorship or banning if an administrator decides they don't like what you say. wink.gif
There's plenty of fluff hyping Wikipedia on Wikipedia itself so there's no need to include sites dedicated to praising Wikipedia (if there is such a thing), however Wikipedia does have some positive points and well-written articles get included.

Here's some so far:

The Guardian: Can You Trust Wikipedia?
http://technology.guardian.co.uk/opinion/s...1599325,00.html

The Register: Who owns your Wikipedia bio?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/06/wikipedia_bio/
Article criticial of Wikipedia.
"It's also like playing a game in the sense that playing it has no consequences. If something goes wrong, you just restart. No problem!" -Jimbo Wales on Wikipedia
"Wikipedia as a massively scalable, online role-playing game, or RPG. Players can assume fictional online identities - and many "editors" do just that. And drive-by shootings are common."

The Register: Wikipedia: magic, monkeys and typewriters
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10/24/wikipedia_letters/
Mostly letters from previous Wikipedians who decided to stop editing.
"At first I thought Wikipedia was a great idea and started writing about the subjects I know with an academic take on them. [...] In the end I couldn't recognise my articles after about a week, and a few months later there was nothing left of them, having sufferd zillions of re-edits, irrelevant sentence adding and re-writes due to NPOV actually meaning MPOVNSE -my point of view, not someone elses. [...] I just gave up and let the idiots who THOUGHT they knew something about the subject or those with a vested interest in making things look good take the helm."

Why Wikipedia sucks. Big time.
http://homepage.univie.ac.at/horst.prillin.../06/000623.html

Why Wikipedia Must Jettison It's Anti-Elitism
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/12/30/142458/25
Article by Larry Sanger, co-founder (along with Jimbo Wales) of Wikipedia.

Wikipedia Watch
http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/
Mostly concerned with Wikipedia privacy issues. From Daniel Brandt, also the owner of the Google Watch website. He raises an interesting question: Who should be sued for a defamatory Wikipedia article?

A Criticism of Wikipedia
http://www.kapitalism.net/thoughts/wikipedia.htm
Well-written article discussing the problems with Wikipedia. Lots of good points. Author claims to have been subjected to Denial-of-Service attacks by the 'Wikipedia cabal' after publishing it on his website.

WikiWatch
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/wikiwoo.htm
Blog. Updated frequently. Good general criticism of Wikipedia, but also gets into the nitty-gritty of it (i.e. discusses specific articles). The author is a librarian.

Swastikipedia, by Jason Scott
http://ascii.textfiles.com/archives/000100.html
Article focusing on the unreliability of Wikipedia

Wikipedia and the Future of Social Computing, by Ross Mayfield
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/12/30/142458/25
A paraphrase of a speech by Jimbo Wales, pro-Wikipedia stance but accepting that he is the unelected "constitutional monarch" of Wikipedia.
Has some interesting comments.

http://www.slis.indiana.edu/news/story.php?story_id=958
"The present generation of bloggers seems to imagine that such crassly egotistical behavior is socially acceptable and that time-honored editorial and filtering functions have no place in cyberspace. Undoubtedly, these are the same individuals who believe that the free-for-all, communitarian approach of Wikipedia is the way forward. Librarians, of course, know better."

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/wikiwoo.htm#Byrne2
"In general, Wikipedia is a game. Nobody making policy decisions is getting their knowledge of the Iraq War, stem cells or Social Security from Wikipedia, so in the grand scheme of things, it doesn't matter what Wikipedia says. But when they start writing biographies of living individuals, that can have real-world consequences on a person's life. It's not a game to those people."

CNet's review:
http://reviews.cnet.com/Wikipedia/4505-3642_7-31563879.html

http://www.opinioneditorials.com/guestcont...y_20051205.html
"Wikipedia should not be cited in the media nor anywhere for support because it is no different than quoting various anonymous sources who have no knowledge of the topic or who have fibs to spread about the topic."
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Donny
post Tue 2nd May 2006, 8:23am
Post #2


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 240
Joined: Fri 24th Mar 2006, 11:27pm
Member No.: 79



Wiki-fiddler, wiki wanker and pediaphile are derisory terms for Wikipedia editors invented by journalist Andrew Orlowski of the online IT newspaper The Register{{ref|big_book}}.

Orlowski has written several generally hostile articles about Wikipedia in the online IT newspaper The Register. In these articles, Orlowski called Wikipedia editors "wiki-fiddlers"{{ref|big_book}}, or "wiki wankers", and "pediaphiles", perhaps a pun on pedophiles. Supposed characteristics of a Wiki-Fiddler include
  1. making pointless edits, such as adding commas, merely in order to increase edit counts, and move up the "hierarchy" of Wikipedia,
  2. QUOTE
    Although the project has no shortage of volunteers, most add nothing: busying themselves with edits that simply add or takeaway a comma. These are housekeeping tasks that build up credits for the participants, so they can rise higher in the organization.
    {{ref|quality_problems}}
  3. having little expertise,
  4. driving out people with actual knowledge of a topic,
  5. QUOTE
    We increasingly hear of experts who attempt to contribute to the project being repelled. If you're an expert, and you want to help Wikipedia, be prepared for months of fighting - usually with people who don't know what they're talking about.
    {{ref|monkeys_and_typewriters}}
  6. adding irrelevant material to articles,
  7. being a
    QUOTE
    small coterie of self-selecting wiki fiddlers'
    {{ref|big_book}},
  8. youth. Wiki-Fiddlers are described as being "children" and "spotty teenagers". Wikipedia is described as the "children's encyclopedia".
Wiki-fiddlers are also accused of misrepresenting subjects by populating Wikipedia with minor trivia rather than central facts. Orlowski points out, in particular, Wikipedia's entry on Buckminster Fuller and its focus on Eric Drexler:
QUOTE
''For example, if you consult the world's most useless online text, the captive Wikipedia, you'll see Fuller's entry is a plug for Eric "AI" Drexler.''{{ref|buckminster_fuller}}

and the lack of an article on Mary Midgley:
QUOTE
''Needless to say, there's no entry for Mary Midgley''{{ref|big_book}}

Five hours after this article was published, an entry in Wikipedia for Mary Midgley was created.

The consensus building process of Wikipedia is also ridiculed. Orlowski describes Wikipedia in terms of "monkeys trying to type Shakespeare" and quotes a statement
QUOTE
''a source whose organizing principle appears to be that twenty jackasses make an expert.''{{ref|not_linux}}

To support his case, Orlowski also quotes from articles{{ref|faith_based}} by McHenry Robert McHenry, former editor-in-chief of the Encyclopedia Britannica, in which McHenry describes the gradual degeneration of an article on Alexander Hamilton during a process of multiple edits:
QUOTE
''In fact, the earlier versions of the article are better written overall, with fewer murky passages and sophomoric summaries. Contrary to the faith, the article has, in fact, been edited into mediocrity.''

and by Nicholas G. Carr{{ref|amorality_web_2.0}} in which Carr quotes from the Jane Fonda and Bill Gates pages of Wikipedia. The response of Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales is also described.{{ref|quality_problems}}
QUOTE
''Excellent article! Well balanced and thoughtful! Ok, well, entertaining anyway.''


According to the results of Google searches{{ref|google_wiki-fiddler}}, Orlowski's term ''wiki-fiddler'' has not achieved widespread currency beyond its originator. However, it has been adopted in other ''The Register'' articles{{ref|wikipedia_growth}}.

Orlowski has also commented on problems with self-edited biographies on Wikipedia{{ref|who_owns_bio}}. Beginning with the cases of John Seigenthaler Sr., falsely labelled a Kennedy assassin in a Wikipedia article, and Jens Stoltenberg, similarly falsely labelled a paedophile in a Wikipedia article, he goes on to contrast the experiences of three people who tried to edit their own biographical articles, Daniel Brandt, Jimmy Wales and Cory Doctorow, and demonstrates that Wikipedia is inconsistent in allowing or denying users the right to edit biographies of themselves. He quotes Daniel Brandt on the inconsistent application of the Wikipedia rules:
QUOTE
''All the rules are cancelled if they like you, and all the rules are enforced up the hilt if they hate you.''

and_suggests
QUOTE
''Trying to massage one's reputation out on the toxic wastelands of the web can go one of two ways. If the attempt is successful, it leaves you looking as foolish and vain as Doctorow. If unsuccessful, it guarantees an energy-sapping defeat.''


Orlowski went on to find fault with Wikipedia for failing to help track down the defamer of Siegenthaler{{ref|moral_responsibility}} entitled "There's no Wikipedia entry for moral responsibility". A Wikipedia article on moral responsibility was created shortly afterwards.

He also critically reviewed a favourable article in the science journal Nature on Wikipedia{{ref|science_comparison}} and claimed in another article that Wikipedia's article on paedophiles is
QUOTE
''perhaps rather more sympathetic than an average parent or judge might be to this predilection''{{ref|ten_million}}


External links

[*]Andrew Orlowski's personal website

References/External links
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Donny
post Sun 7th May 2006, 3:23am
Post #3


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 240
Joined: Fri 24th Mar 2006, 11:27pm
Member No.: 79



Wiki Whiners Boo hoo! Wikipedia said something bad about me!
http://dan.tobias.name/controversies/cyber/wiki.html
This site is by a Wikipedian, but it's actually rather a useful reference to people who've tried to alter articles about themselves.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Donny
post Wed 10th May 2006, 7:34am
Post #4


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 240
Joined: Fri 24th Mar 2006, 11:27pm
Member No.: 79



Just adding some more links which have been seen recently:

Wikipedia: A Nightmare Of Libel and Slander - Israel News Agency
http://www.israelnewsagency.com/wikipedial...ia48330508.html

Wikipedia’s weakness is the same as its strength: anyone can edit it.
http://www.listener.co.nz/issue/203/column..._both_ways.html
Mentions Wikipedia Review and links here.

Turf Wars - Wikipedia spars with a splinter site for truth
http://www.villagevoice.com/screens/0618,d...l,73055,28.html
Village Voice article

wikisucks blog
http://wikisucks.blogspot.com/
Anti-Wikipedia blog

The Wikipedia FAQK
http://www.wired.com/news/columns/0,70670-0.html
Comedy article

Encyclopedia Dramatica
http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/index.php/Wikipedia
More comedy

The Great Failure of Wikipedia
http://ascii.textfiles.com/archives/000060.html
Jason Scott's article

Wikipedia and Christian Abuse of Wikipedia
http://doubleblue.info - no longer exists - Moderator
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
LamontStormstar
post Sat 30th September 2006, 4:52pm
Post #5


Postmaster
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,359
Joined: Fri 18th Aug 2006, 7:25am
Member No.: 342

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/wiki/Me_and_Wikipedia

This post has been edited by LamontStormstar: Mon 27th August 2007, 7:10pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Lir
post Sat 20th January 2007, 9:39pm
Post #6


Communist
*****

Group: Inactive
Posts: 978
Joined: Sun 26th Feb 2006, 10:27pm
Member No.: 4



An anti-wikipedia blog: http://parkerpeters.livejournal.com/
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Vincent
post Tue 20th March 2007, 7:47pm
Post #7


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 89
Joined: Tue 20th Mar 2007, 12:51am
From: Silicon Valley, CA, USA
Member No.: 1,154

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Dear The Wikipedia Review Readers:

Here's a new site critical of Wikipedia: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Wikipedia_Problems/. It's new but has had a little activity as of late besides.

Thanks!

Vincent

This post has been edited by Vincent: Fri 23rd March 2007, 7:58pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
blissyu2
post Thu 5th July 2007, 3:10pm
Post #8


the wookie
*********

Group: On Vacation
Posts: 4,596
Joined: Mon 27th Feb 2006, 12:14am
From: Australia
Member No.: 5

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Also of course the old faithful:

http://www.wikitruth.info/

[Moderator's note: Removed link to non-existant site wikiabuse.com]
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
natmaka
post Wed 12th December 2007, 3:00pm
Post #9


Neophyte


Group: Contributors
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu 11th May 2006, 4:10pm
From: France
Member No.: 175

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



http://makarevitch.org/rant/wikipedia.html - French language ahead!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
davidhill
post Sun 30th December 2007, 8:20pm
Post #10


Neophyte


Group: Contributors
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun 30th Dec 2007, 12:08pm
Member No.: 4,314



you can add http://www.thewif.org.uk to the list, the website of the World Innovation Foundation who had a tussle in 2006 with Wiki's executive director and wiki nuts.

[Moderator's note: The most relevant links are here and here]
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DoctorHver
post Sat 26th January 2008, 4:08pm
Post #11


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat 26th Jan 2008, 12:58am
Member No.: 4,593



THE GREAT FAILURE OF WIKIPEDIA: http://www.cow.net/transcript.txt
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jonathan
post Sat 13th September 2008, 7:01am
Post #12


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue 18th Apr 2006, 7:06pm
Member No.: 131



Link to Kelly Martin's blog?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Milton Roe
post Sat 13th September 2008, 7:17am
Post #13


Known alias of J. Random Troll
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined: Thu 28th Feb 2008, 1:03am
Member No.: 5,156

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Jonathan @ Sat 13th September 2008, 12:01am) *

Link to Kelly Martin's blog?

Not.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Sat 15th November 2008, 4:45pm
Post #14


Neophyte


Group: Contributors
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu 7th Dec 2006, 5:40am
Member No.: 697



The Anti Wikipedia Resource
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Angela Kennedy
post Sat 15th November 2008, 5:07pm
Post #15


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 302
Joined: Sun 30th Sep 2007, 8:05am
Member No.: 3,293

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



The Wierd World of Wikipedia, by Martin J. Walker

Available on scrolling down the left hand column of links here:

http://www.theoneclickgroup.co.uk/
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Universe Daily
post Tue 28th April 2009, 12:27am
Post #16


New Member
*

Group: Contributors
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue 21st Apr 2009, 7:05am
From: Queensland
Member No.: 11,515

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



JimmyWales.Org and JimmyWales.Net both go to the same discussion forum but I'm thinking of doing something else with the dot net at some later date.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
zacherystaylor
post Mon 30th November 2009, 5:48pm
Post #17


Neophyte


Group: Contributors
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed 25th Nov 2009, 3:34pm
Member No.: 15,586

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Here's my new contribution.

http://zakherys.tripod.com/wikipedia_censorship.htm

I'll refine this page over the next couple of weeks and start a new string on the subject of preventing School violence or any other violence when I get the chance but not today.

I still think there are some good things about Wikipedia and if it is reformed it could be very benificial if not there could be another one built to do a better job if it's run by sincere people. This would be much more work and take more time so reform is preferable if there isn't to much resistance.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Somey
post Mon 30th November 2009, 6:18pm
Post #18


Can't actually moderate (or even post)
*********

Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,815
Joined: Sat 17th Jun 2006, 7:47pm
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275



QUOTE(zacherystaylor @ Mon 30th November 2009, 11:48am) *
I'll refine this page over the next couple of weeks and start a new string on the subject of preventing School violence or any other violence when I get the chance but not today.

You'll definitely want to left-justify and shrink most (if not all) of that really, really large text in the upper-half of that thing. Maybe wider margins and a few images too, just to give it a more aesthetically-pleasing layout.

Otherwise, looks good! smile.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
GlassBeadGame
post Mon 30th November 2009, 7:07pm
Post #19


Dharma Bum
*********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 7,919
Joined: Sat 17th Feb 2007, 12:55am
From: My name it means nothing. My age it means less. The country I come from is called the Mid-West.
Member No.: 981



QUOTE(Somey @ Mon 30th November 2009, 1:18pm) *

QUOTE(zacherystaylor @ Mon 30th November 2009, 11:48am) *
I'll refine this page over the next couple of weeks and start a new string on the subject of preventing School violence or any other violence when I get the chance but not today.

You'll definitely want to left-justify and shrink most (if not all) of that really, really large text in the upper-half of that thing. Maybe wider margins and a few images too, just to give it a more aesthetically-pleasing layout.

Otherwise, looks good! smile.gif


I used to have some tripod sites, too. I know the css folks will scream but the easiest thing to do address the wide margins is to put all that text in a table with:
CODE

<table width="80%" border="0" align="center"><tr><td>
followed by all of your text in the body segment the close out with
CODE
</td></tr></table>
just before the close-body tag. Also if you want to keep the wallpaper you would have to move it inside the table as
CODE
<table width="80%" border="0" align="center" background="bg.jpg">
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
CharlotteWebb
post Mon 30th November 2009, 8:41pm
Post #20


Postmaster General
********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,740
Joined: Mon 18th Jun 2007, 2:09am
Member No.: 1,727

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



I'm screaming already, but you could at least use a <div> tag rather than single-cell table.

I think most people would agree that the excessive font-size is the most serious issue with that page.

You might consider finding a good wiki-farm actually, one which isn't plagued by pornographic popup ads and such. Scribblewiki was pretty tame in that regard, just one standard-size banner which was fairly easy to paint out or simply ignore. I used to have some pages there but apparently the site got shut down and now redirects to some game-cheats forum, so I'm looking for something better myself.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 25th 10 14, 2:45am