Wikipedia Review

Last updated
Wikipedia Review
Wikipediareviewlogo.png
The Wikipedia Review logo, which uses a white hat
Type of site
Internet watchdog, Internet forum and blog
Available inEnglish, German
Revenue Accepts donations
URL wikipediareview.com
CommercialNo
RegistrationOptional (required to post)
LaunchedOriginal site: November 2005;17 years ago (2005-11) [1]
Current site: February 19, 2006;17 years ago (2006-02-19) [2]
Current statusOnline

Wikipedia Review is an Internet forum and blog for the discussion of Wikimedia Foundation projects, in particular the content and conflicts of Wikipedia. [3] [4] Wikipedia Review sought to act as a watchdog website, scrutinizing Wikipedia and reporting on its flaws. [5] It provides an independent forum to discuss Wikipedia editors and their influence on Wikipedia content. At its peak, participants included current Wikipedia editors, former Wikipedia editors, users banned from Wikipedia, and people who had never edited. [6] Though the site is still partially running, the last post was on 31 May 2012. [7]

Contents

Background

The site was founded in November 2005 by "Igor Alexander", and hosted by ProBoards. [1] On 19 February 2006 it moved to its own domain name using Invision Power Board software. [2] [8] The site required registration using a valid e-mail address to post and blacklisted email providers that allowed anonymity so as to discourage the operation of multiple accounts by a single user. [9]

Wikipedia Review was cited for its discussion of wiki-editing concepts and its participation in the evaluation of the Palo Alto Research Company's WikiDashboard. [10] [11] [12]

Commentary

Wikipedia Review is not a conspiracy, a team-building exercise, a role-playing game, or an experiment in collusion. It is not meant as a resource or training ground for those who would instill fear and misery in others. It does not exist to corrupt, but to expose corruption; it does not exist to tear down institutions, but to expose the ways in which institutions are torn down; it does not exist to hate, but is meant to expose hate in others. To expose these things is not evil. It is not a monolithic entity, nor the sum of its parts. Like-mindedness does not imply singularity of purpose; respect for the rights of one group does not imply disrespect for the rights of another. It is not intended to be predictable, consistent, or dull.

Imagine a world in which human beings are not user accounts, are not programmable, and are not mere words on a display screen. That's what we're doing...

Statement made when the site was out of service in 2008, Wikipedia Review [13]

Seth Finkelstein wrote in The Guardian that Wikipedia Review has provided a focal point for investigation into Wikipedia-related matters such as the "Essjay controversy". [14] [15] Cade Metz, writing for The Register , credited Wikipedia Review with the discovery of a private mailing list that led to the resignation of a Wikipedia administrator; he also wrote that a Wikipedia proposal called "BADSITES" intended to ban the mention of Wikipedia Review and similar sites on Wikipedia. [16] The Independent noted that "allegations against certain administrators came to a head on a site called Wikipedia Review, where people debate the administrators' actions." [17] The Irish technology website Silicon Republic suggested visiting Wikipedia Review in order to "follow disputes, discussions, editors and general bureaucracy on Wikipedia". [18] Philip Coppens used posts made on Wikipedia Review to help construct a report, published in Nexus Magazine , on WikiScanner and allegations that intelligence agencies had been using Wikipedia to spread disinformation. [19]

Content and structure

Wikipedia Review's publicly accessible forums are broken up into four general topic areas:

  1. Forum information;
  2. Wikimedia-oriented discussion, which contains subforums focusing on editors, the Wikipedia bureaucracy, meta discussion, articles and general Wikimedia-focused topics not fitting elsewhere;
  3. Media forums containing a news feed and discussion about news and blogs featuring Wikipedia/Wikimedia; and
  4. Off topic, non-Wikimedia related discussion. [20]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">MeatballWiki</span> Wiki dedicated to online communities

MeatballWiki is a wiki dedicated to online communities, network culture, and hypermedia. According to founder Sunir Shah, it ran on "a hacked-up version of UseModWiki". In April 2013, after several spam attacks and a period of downtime, the site was made read-only. In March 2021, the site was de-spammed and reopened for editing as part of a rebuilding effort alongside Ward's Wiki and Community Wiki.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">English Wikipedia</span> English-language edition of Wikipedia

The English Wikipedia is the primary English-language edition of Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia. It was created by Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger on January 15, 2001, as Wikipedia's first edition.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Barnstar</span> Barn decoration in the United States

A barnstar is a painted object or image, often in the shape of a five-pointed star but occasionally in a circular "wagon wheel" style, used to decorate a barn in some parts of the United States. They have no structural purpose but may be considered lucky, akin to a horseshoe mounted over a doorway. They are especially common in Pennsylvania and frequently seen in German-American farming communities. They are also found in Canada, particularly in the province of Ontario.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Web 2.0</span> World Wide Web sites that use technology beyond the static pages of earlier Web sites

Web 2.0 refers to websites that emphasize user-generated content, ease of use, participatory culture and interoperability for end users.

nofollow is a setting on a web page hyperlink that directs search engines not to use the link for page ranking calculations. It is specified in the page as a type of link relation; that is: <a rel="nofollow" ...>. Because search engines often calculate a site's importance according to the number of hyperlinks from other sites, the nofollow setting allows website authors to indicate that the presence of a link is not an endorsement of the target site's importance.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criticism of Wikipedia</span>

Most criticism of Wikipedia has been directed toward its content, community of established users, and processes. Critics have questioned its factual reliability, the readability and organization of the articles, the lack of methodical fact-checking, and its political bias. Concerns have also been raised about systemic bias along gender, racial, political, corporate, institutional, and national lines. In addition, conflicts of interest arising from corporate campaigns to influence content have also been highlighted. Further concerns include the vandalism and partisanship facilitated by anonymous editing, clique behavior, social stratification between a guardian class and newer users, excessive rule-making, edit warring, and uneven policy application.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Intellipedia</span> US Intelligence Community encyclopedia

Intellipedia is an online system for collaborative data sharing used by the United States Intelligence Community (IC). It was established as a pilot project in late 2005 and formally announced in April 2006. Intellipedia consists of three wikis running on the separate JWICS (Intellipedia-TS), SIPRNet (Intellipedia-S), and DNI-U (Intellipedia-U) networks. The levels of classification allowed for information on the three wikis are Top Secret Sensitive Compartmented Information, Secret (S), and Sensitive But Unclassified information, respectively. Each of the wikis is used by individuals with appropriate clearances from the 18 agencies of the US intelligence community and other national-security related organizations, including Combatant Commands and other federal departments. The wikis are not open to the public.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Essjay controversy</span> Controversy over a Wikipedia user and Wikia employees identity

The Essjay controversy was an incident in which Ryan Jordan, a Wikipedia editor who went by the username "Essjay", falsely presented himself as a university professor of religion from 2005 to 2007, during which time he was elected to top positions of trust by the community, including administrator and arbitrator. In July 2006, The New Yorker published an article about "Essjay", and mentioned that he was a university professor of religion. The New Yorker later acknowledged that they did not know his real name.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of wikis</span> History of wiki collaborative platforms

The history of wikis began in 1994, when Ward Cunningham gave the name "WikiWikiWeb" to the knowledge base, which ran on his company's website at c2.com, and the wiki software that powered it. The wiki went public in March 1995, the date used in anniversary celebrations of the wiki's origins. c2.com is thus the first true wiki, or a website with pages and links that can be easily edited via the browser, with a reliable version history for each page. He chose "WikiWikiWeb" as the name based on his memories of the "Wiki Wiki Shuttle" at Honolulu International Airport, and because "wiki" is the Hawaiian word for "quick".

Wikipedia has been studied extensively. Between 2001 and 2010, researchers published at least 1,746 peer-reviewed articles about the online encyclopedia. Such studies are greatly facilitated by the fact that Wikipedia's database can be downloaded without help from the site owner.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">GroupLens Research</span> Computer science research lab

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wikiversity</span> Wikimedia wiki for learning materials that anyone can edit

Wikiversity is a Wikimedia Foundation project that supports learning communities, their learning materials, and resulting activities. It differs from Wikipedia in that it offers tutorials and other materials for the fostering of learning, rather than an encyclopedia. It is available in many languages.

<i>The Wikipedia Revolution</i> Popular history book by Andrew Lih

The Wikipedia Revolution: How a Bunch of Nobodies Created the World's Greatest Encyclopedia is a 2009 popular history book by new media researcher and writer Andrew Lih.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wikipedia community</span> Volunteers who create and maintain Wikipedia

The Wikipedia community, collectively and individually known as Wikipedians, is an online community that volunteers to create and maintain Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia. Since August 2012, the word "Wikipedian" has been an Oxford Dictionary entry.

Ed Huai-Hsin Chi is a Taiwanese American computer scientist and research scientist at Google, known for his early work in applying the theory of information scent to predict usability of websites.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Outline of Wikipedia</span> Overview of and topical guide to Wikipedia

The following outline is provided as an overview of and a topical guide to Wikipedia:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Aaron Halfaker</span> American computer scientist

Aaron Halfaker is a principal applied scientist at Microsoft Research. He previously served as a research scientist at the Wikimedia Foundation until 2020.

A WikiProject, or Wikiproject, is an affinity group for contributors with shared goals within the Wikimedia movement. WikiProjects are prevalent within the largest wiki, Wikipedia, and exist to varying degrees within sibling projects such as Wiktionary, Wikiquote, Wikidata, and Wikisource. They also exist in different languages, and translation of articles is a form of their collaboration.

Abdigani Diriye is a Somali computer scientist and research scientist at IBM Research – Africa, working in the fields of human-computer interaction (HCI), data mining and financial technology (FinTech). Diriye was named a TEDGlobal 2017 fellow, an MIT Technology Review 'Innovator Under 35', and a 'Next Einstein Forum' fellow.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Deletion of articles on Wikipedia</span>

Volunteer editors of Wikipedia delete articles from the online encyclopedia regularly, following processes that have been formulated by the site's community over time. The most common route is the outright deletion of articles that clearly violate the rules of the website. Other mechanisms include an intermediate collaborative process that bypasses a complete discussion, and a whole debate at the dedicated forum called Articles for deletion (AfD). As a technical action, deletion can only be done by a subset of editors assigned particular specialized privileges by the community, called administrators. An omission that has been carried out can be contested by appeal to the deleting administrator or on another discussion board called Deletion review (DRV).

References

  1. 1 2 "Original Wikipedia Review on Proboards". Wikipedia Review. 2005-11-25. Archived from the original on 2006-01-17. Retrieved 2009-04-14.
  2. 1 2 "First post on wikipediareview.com". Wikipedia Review. 2006-02-19. Archived from the original on 2006-05-31.
  3. Mahadevan, Jeremy (2006-03-05). "Not everything on Wikipedia is fact". New Straits Times . Retrieved 2008-07-01.
  4. "L'édition de référence libre et collaborative : le cas de Wikipedia" (in French). Institut national de recherche pédagogique. April 2006. p. 7. Archived from the original on 2011-09-29. Retrieved 2008-07-01.
  5. LaPlante, Alice (2006-07-14). "Spawn Of Wikipedia". InformationWeek . Archived from the original on 2011-06-12. Retrieved 2012-09-01.
  6. Shankbone, David (June 2008). "Nobody's safe in cyberspace". The Brooklyn Rail . Retrieved 2008-07-01.
  7. "The Wikipedia Review". wikipediareview.com. Retrieved 2023-05-05.
  8. "Second post on wikipediareview.com". Wikipedia Review. Was The Wikipedia Review created by Igor Alexander? Yes. Is The Wikipedia Review run by Igor Alexander? No.
  9. "Info for new registrants". Wikipedia Review. 2006-03-24. Retrieved 2008-07-01.
  10. Ed H. Chi, Peter Pirolli, Bongwon Suh, Aniket Kittur, Bryan Pendleton, Todd Mytkowicz (2008). "Augmented social cognition: understanding social foraging and social sensemaking" (PDF). Palo Alto Research Center. p. 5. Retrieved 2008-07-01.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  11. Bongwon Suh, Ed H. Chi, Aniket Kittur, Bryan A. Pendleton (2008). Lifting the veil: improving accountability and social transparency in Wikipedia with wikidashboard. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. General chairs: Mary Czerwinski and Arnie Lund; program chair: Desney Tan. Association for Computing Machinery. pp. 1037–1040. ISBN   978-1-60558-011-1 . Retrieved 2008-07-01.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  12. Chi, E. H.; Suh, B.; Kittur, A (2008-04-06). "Providing social transparency through visualizations in Wikipedia" (PDF). Acm-Sigchi. CHI 2008, Florence, Italy: IBM / Palo Alto Research Company. Social Data Analysis Workshop. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2008-07-04. Retrieved 2008-07-04.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: location (link)
  13. "Wikipedia Review out-of-service page". Wikipedia Review. 2008-06-24. Archived from the original on 2008-07-02. Retrieved 2008-07-02.
  14. Finkelstein, Seth (2007-12-06). "Inside, Wikipedia is more like a sweatshop than Santa's workshop". The Guardian . Retrieved 2008-07-01.
  15. "Who is Essjay?, Probably he's Ryan Jordan". Wikipedia Review. 2006-07-26.
  16. Metz, Cade (2007-12-04). "Secret mailing list rocks Wikipedia". The Register . Retrieved 2008-07-01.
  17. Marsden, Rhodri (2007-12-06). "Cyberclinic: Who are the editors of Wikipedia?". The Independent . Retrieved 2008-07-01.
  18. Boran, Marie (2007-12-04). "Wikipedia under fire for 'editorial elite'". Silicon Republic. Archived from the original on 2009-04-22. Retrieved 2008-07-01.
  19. Coppens, Philip (October–November 2007). "The Truths and Lies of WikiWorld". Nexus . pp. 11–15, 77. Retrieved 2008-07-02.
  20. "Wikipedia Review" . Retrieved 9 June 2010.