« | Main | "When I was in hospital I kept on telling them that the tablets weren't going to do me any good 'cause my brain was dead." »

October 23, 2013

“I categorize from 2007 until now as the decline phase of Wikipedia”

The Decline of Wikipedia: Even As More People Than Ever Rely on It, Fewer People Create It Since 2007, when the new controls began to bite,
the likelihood of a new participant’s edit being immediately deleted has steadily climbed. Over the same period, the proportion of those deletions made by automated tools rather than humans grew. Unsurprisingly, the data also indicate that well-intentioned newcomers are far less likely to still be editing Wikipedia two months after their first try.

Posted by gerardvanderleun at October 23, 2013 11:38 AM. This is an entry on the sideblog of American Digest: Check it out.

Your Say

You pretty much cannot edit or write anything new on Wikipedia, its not a crowdsource thing at all. If you try, you'll get not only deleted but often a nastygram on how you should not try that.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at October 23, 2013 11:41 AM

For example, I tried to edit an entry on Mormonism. Christians do not consider Mormons to be part of their religion. There's like 250 Christians out there for every 1 Mormon.

Mormons think they are Christians (just, better Christians), so I edited the entry to note that Mormons believe themselves to be Christian rather than just "are Christians." That's accurate and more properly represents reality.

I got a nasty comment from someone with a warning that this was hurtful and the edit was reversed.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at October 23, 2013 12:01 PM

Christopher, the truth is a terrible thing to display, especially to a liberal.

Posted by: Peccable at October 23, 2013 12:51 PM

I figure you have to wait until the next election, then the edits will start picking up.

I have edited and had my edits removed. I don't know why. I listed my source. I was going to ask why but I figured why bother.

Posted by: Drust at October 23, 2013 1:27 PM

As they say, the accuracy and neutrality of Wikipedia are inversely proportional to the controversiality of the topic. The driest of facts and topics, such as mathematics and facts from the atlas (lat, long, and pop of various cities, for example), are pretty reliable. Anything remotely related to religion, politics, science, or popular culture are biased as hell. I laugh at anyone who dares quote Wikipedia as a reference.

Posted by: Grizzly at October 23, 2013 8:01 PM

As they say, the accuracy and neutrality of Wikipedia are inversely proportional to the controversiality of the topic. The driest of facts and topics, such as mathematics and facts from the atlas (lat, long, and pop of various cities, for example), are pretty reliable. Anything remotely related to religion, politics, science, or popular culture are biased as hell. I laugh at anyone who dares quote Wikipedia as a reference.

Posted by: Grizzly at October 23, 2013 8:03 PM

I remember first encountering Wiki in around '05 or so, and just for the helluvit looked up Sharps rifles.

The entry claimed that the Sharps was a needle gun, owing to the shape of its cartridges. That pretty much solidified my attitude about the Universal Encyclopedia.

Posted by: Rob De Witt at October 23, 2013 8:56 PM

I think Wikipedia has gotten better but I am sure it can still be improved.

There was another website that was a parody of wikipedia, everything was purposely written incorrectly and outrageously so.

Found it: http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/

I have not been to this site in years, it could have lost its humor, it like wikipedia can be written by anyone.

Posted by: Potsie at October 24, 2013 8:06 AM

The Israelis have paid seminars for their people in the U.S. and Canada to alter any unfavorable mention of Jews or Israel. They actively search out references they don't like and change them to suit their wishes. So, any searches beyond hard facts, i.e. distance to the sun, should not be taken seriously. Alex

Posted by: Alex at October 24, 2013 12:56 PM

Wikipedia editors/gatekeepers remind me of TSA people at the airport. I've had my run-ins with them as well, and for perfectly innocuous material.

They were/are notorious for how they've dealt with climate change skeptics as well.

Posted by: Don Rodrigo at October 25, 2013 12:23 PM

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)