Cyberclinic: Who are the editors of Wikipedia?
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Judging by all the jibes Wikipedia receives, you might have come to the conclusion long ago that it is a collection of fantasies penned by daydreamers. The American satirist Stephen Colbert has even coined the term "wikiality", the process of "creating the reality one wants to believe in".
But the online encyclopedia, which all of us can add to and edit, has a policing structure to ensure there is no foul play. Contentious or mischievous alterations tend to be quickly flagged by a team of administrators, who have been granted privileges to delete pages, lock articles from being changed and deter users from editing.
But rather than be commended, they're suffering more and more accusations of heavy-handedness. Last week, allegations against certain administrators came to a head on a site called Wikipedia Review, where people debate the administrators' actions.
A former member of Wikipedia's arbitration committee has claimed that up to 90 per cent of people who are banned from editing entries are excluded for no good reason. One Wikipedia user living in Utah recently discovered they had been banned from editing; this was because one of their neighbours happens to be Judd Bagley, an executive of a company called Overstock, who has been in a long-running battle with Wikipedia over the content of certain pages. Administrators had simply blocked 1,000 homes in his area, just to be on the safe side that Bagley couldn't get online to make changes.
Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia's founder, has admitted that the site isn't truly democratic, saying that "the core community appreciates when someone is knowledgeable, and [when someone] shouldn't be writing". But the power that Wikipedia admins have to make those judgements on our behalf will, sadly, always be in danger of going to their heads.
Diagnosis required
Might all these instant messaging services finally be starting to work in tandem? And what are the best ways to track people down online?
Email cyberclinic@independent.co.uk, or join the discussions on the daily technology blog, independent.co.uk/cyberclinic
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments