Go Back   AfroChat - African American | Black Discussion Forums > Forum > AfroTechnology > Computers & Gadgetry

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes

 Who is Editing Wikipedia?
Old September 8th, 2007, 05:47 PM   #1 (permalink)
Gorilla
Afro Resident
 
Gorilla's Avatar
 
Gorilla is offline
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 986
Thanks: 53
Thanked 103 Times in 74 Posts
Gorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud of
Rep Power: 28
Credits: 7,808
Who is Editing Wikipedia?

On November 17th, 2005, an anonymous Wikipedia user deleted 15 paragraphs from an article on e-voting machine-vendor Diebold, excising an entire section critical of the company's machines. While anonymous, such changes typically leave behind digital fingerprints offering hints about the contributor, such as the location of the computer used to make the edits.

In this case, the changes came from an IP address reserved for the corporate offices of Diebold itself. And it is far from an isolated case. A new data-mining service launched Monday traces millions of Wikipedia entries to their corporate sources, and for the first time puts comprehensive data behind longstanding suspicions of manipulation, which until now have surfaced only piecemeal in investigations of specific allegations.

Wikipedia Scanner -- the brainchild of Cal Tech computation and neural-systems graduate student Virgil Griffith -- offers users a searchable database that ties millions of anonymous Wikipedia edits to organizations where those edits apparently originated, by cross-referencing the edits with data on who owns the associated block of internet IP addresses.

Inspired by news last year that Congress members' offices had been editing their own entries, Griffith says he got curious, and wanted to know whether big companies and other organizations were doing things in a similarly self-interested vein.

"Everything's better if you do it on a huge scale, and automate it," he says with a grin.

This database is possible thanks to a combination of Wikipedia policies and (mostly) publicly available information.

The online encyclopedia allows anyone to make edits, but keeps detailed logs of all these changes. Users who are logged in are tracked only by their user name, but anonymous changes leave a public record of their IP address.

Share Your Sleuthing!

Cornered any companies polishing up their Wikipedia entries? Spotted any government spooks rewriting history? Try Virgil Griffith's Wikipedia Scanner yourself, then submit your finds and vote on other readers' discoveries here.

The organization also allows downloads of the complete Wikipedia, including records of all these changes.

Griffith thus downloaded the entire encyclopedia, isolating the XML-based records of anonymous changes and IP addresses. He then correlated those IP addresses with public net-address lookup services such as ARIN, as well as private domain-name data provided by IP2Location.com.

The result: A database of 34.4 million edits, performed by 2.6 million organizations or individuals ranging from the CIA to Microsoft to Congressional offices, now linked to the edits they or someone at their organization's net address has made.

Some of this appears to be transparently self-interested, either adding positive, press release-like material to entries, or deleting whole swaths of critical material.

Voting-machine company Diebold provides a good example of the latter, with someone at the company's IP address apparently deleting long paragraphs detailing the security industry's concerns over the integrity of their voting machines, and information about the company's CEO's fund-raising for President Bush.

The text, deleted in November 2005, was quickly restored by another Wikipedia contributor, who advised the anonymous editor, "Please stop removing content from Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism."

A Diebold Election Systems spokesman said he'd look into the matter but could not comment by press time.

Wal-Mart has a series of relatively small changes in 2005 that that burnish the company's image on its own entry while often leaving criticism in, changing a line that its wages are less than other retail stores to a note that it pays nearly double the minimum wage, for example. Another leaves activist criticism on community impact intact, while citing a "definitive" study showing Wal-Mart raised the total number of jobs in a community.

As has been previously reported, politician's offices are heavy users of the system. Former Montana Sen. Conrad Burns' office, for example, apparently changed one critical paragraph headed "A controversial voice" to "A voice for farmers," with predictably image-friendly content following it.

Perhaps interestingly, many of the most apparently self-interested changes come from before 2006, when news of the Congressional offices' edits reached the headlines. This may indicate a growing sophistication with the workings of Wikipedia over time, or even the rise of corporate Wikipedia policies.

Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales told Wired News he was aware of the new service, but needed time to experiment with it before commenting.

The vast majority of changes are fairly innocuous, however. Employees at the CIA's net address, for example, have been busy -- but with little that would indicate their place of apparent employment, or a particular bias.

One entry on "Black September in Jordan" contains wholesale additions, with specific details that read like a popular history book or an eyewitness' memoir.

Many more are simple copy edits, or additions to local town entries or school histories. One CIA entry deals with the details of lyrics sung in a Buffy the Vampire Slayer episode.

Griffith says he launched the project hoping to find scandals, particularly at obvious targets such as companies like Halliburton. But there's a more practical goal, too: By exposing the anonymous edits that companies such as drugs and big pharmaceutical companies make in entries that affect their businesses, it could help experts check up on the changes and make sure they're accurate, he says.

For now, he has just scratched the surface of the database of millions of entries. But he's putting it online so others can look too.

The nonprofit Wikimedia Foundation, which runs Wikipedia, did not respond to e-mail and telephone inquiries Monday.


Source: See Who's Editing Wikipedia - Diebold, the CIA, a Campaign

Wikipedia Scanner:
List anonymous wikipedia edits from interesting organizations

Wikipedia Scanner on the Colbert Report:
YouTube - Colbert

I love this project. Its probably one of the most innovative ways to catch people trying to manipulate public information. A lot of interesting folks have been caught trying to edit things.
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Gorilla For This Useful Post:
ardamus (October 5th, 2007), DBlack (September 18th, 2007)

 
Old September 8th, 2007, 05:59 PM   #2 (permalink)
poeticasylum1
Afro Resident
 
poeticasylum1's Avatar
 
poeticasylum1 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Houston
Posts: 657
Thanks: 24
Thanked 243 Times in 134 Posts
poeticasylum1 has a reputation beyond reputepoeticasylum1 has a reputation beyond reputepoeticasylum1 has a reputation beyond reputepoeticasylum1 has a reputation beyond reputepoeticasylum1 has a reputation beyond reputepoeticasylum1 has a reputation beyond reputepoeticasylum1 has a reputation beyond reputepoeticasylum1 has a reputation beyond reputepoeticasylum1 has a reputation beyond reputepoeticasylum1 has a reputation beyond reputepoeticasylum1 has a reputation beyond repute
Rep Power: 35
Credits: 6,515
Wikipedia is great for instant information but it can be trouble. Many professors don't like it because the information can be edited or misleading. Usually I try not go there but when all else fails. Wikipedia is the answer.
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

 
Old September 8th, 2007, 07:29 PM   #3 (permalink)
Gorilla
Afro Resident
 
Gorilla's Avatar
 
Gorilla is offline
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 986
Thanks: 53
Thanked 103 Times in 74 Posts
Gorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud of
Rep Power: 28
Credits: 7,808
Quote:
Originally Posted by poeticasylum1 View Post
Wikipedia is great for instant information but it can be trouble. Many professors don't like it because the information can be edited or misleading. Usually I try not go there but when all else fails. Wikipedia is the answer.
Wikipedia is a lot more accurate than a lot of people realize. However, no Encylopedia is error free or an end all information tool.
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

 
Old September 15th, 2007, 02:06 AM   #4 (permalink)
Great Ursus
Afr0 Resident
Emerging Voice
 
Great Ursus is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Norf
Posts: 259
Thanks: 232
Thanked 61 Times in 35 Posts
Great Ursus will become famous soon enough
Rep Power: 0
Credits: 1,682
Yet this explains its inconsistancies regarding dependable reference.
Good article and good info.
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

 
Old September 15th, 2007, 04:32 AM   #5 (permalink)
Terminal Server
Afr0 Resident
Emerging Voice
 
Terminal Server is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 219
Thanks: 0
Thanked 35 Times in 24 Posts
Terminal Server can only hope to improve
Rep Power: 0
Credits: 1,458
Quote:
Wikipedia is a lot more accurate than a lot of people realize. However, no Encylopedia is error free or an end all information tool.
This is very true. Wikipedia is no more than a reference that should be rechecked for accuracies as well as errors. It's a starting point for information, not an end all source. People need to realize and understand this.
__________________
"Ignorance, allied with power, is the most ferocious enemy justice can have" -James Baldwin
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

 
Old September 17th, 2007, 09:15 AM   #6 (permalink)
MzKwietStorm
Afro Resident
 
MzKwietStorm's Avatar
 
MzKwietStorm is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 663
Thanks: 93
Thanked 96 Times in 56 Posts
MzKwietStorm has much to be proud ofMzKwietStorm has much to be proud ofMzKwietStorm has much to be proud ofMzKwietStorm has much to be proud ofMzKwietStorm has much to be proud ofMzKwietStorm has much to be proud ofMzKwietStorm has much to be proud ofMzKwietStorm has much to be proud ofMzKwietStorm has much to be proud of
Rep Power: 23
Credits: 5,806
I was told by a professor in college that anyone can post information about a topic on Wikipedia, which is why we couldn't use it as a reference when writing papers. He gave an example with the wrestler Chris Benoit. Benoit was supposed to attend some kind of event, but someone posted on Wiki that he couldn't make it because he was mourning the death of his wife and I think this was like a day before the death of his family broke the news.
__________________
You can't enjoy where you're going, if you deny where you've been!
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

 
Old September 17th, 2007, 09:51 AM   #7 (permalink)
Nyela
Afro Resident
 
Nyela's Avatar
 
Nyela is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Southeast
Posts: 558
Thanks: 115
Thanked 149 Times in 79 Posts
Nyela has a spectacular aura aboutNyela has a spectacular aura aboutNyela has a spectacular aura aboutNyela has a spectacular aura aboutNyela has a spectacular aura aboutNyela has a spectacular aura about
Rep Power: 0
Credits: 3,786
I agree MzQuiet...

None of my professors allow it in any type of research for any reason. I have found many discrepancies when looking for information on various things. So as a rule, I don't utilize it. My school's database is a wealth of authenticated information. It works for me.
__________________
Never be de tail uh nothing.
Zora Neale Hurston


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

 
Old September 17th, 2007, 03:52 PM   #8 (permalink)
Gorilla
Afro Resident
 
Gorilla's Avatar
 
Gorilla is offline
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 986
Thanks: 53
Thanked 103 Times in 74 Posts
Gorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud ofGorilla has much to be proud of
Rep Power: 28
Credits: 7,808
The fact that Wikipedia allows anyone to write articles or edit them and we don't see a much higher level of vandalism is amazing. I don't really care whether or not a professor allows it because it always seems to be based on personal opinion and trying to reduce the complex implications of using it. In my personal experience, the things I typically research the most on Wikipedia have been quite accurate and in depth compared to closed paid sources. My school's wealth of access does usually receive more weight because of popular opinion but thats what I use. But for starting points or for minor non-controversial details (Like any Encyclopedia Should be used), Wikipedia still remains my weapon of choice.

Also, there have been studies about Wikipedia's accuracy. None of them are really conclusive, but they definitely provide some points worth thinking about.

Wikipedia has some very strong advantages. People are free to correct errors and provide sources easily. People are comprised of non-experts, hobbyist and experts. People are not restricted in the classical ways other encyclopedias are in terms of length. Wikipedia tends to sort the relevance of material presented very well. Additionally, People who contribute to Wikipedia can contribute to topics they really have very strong interest in and people who have share those same interest can edit (rather than some general editor who may not have a background in the subject editing). Its also completely open to the people and available in tons of different languages.

In my opinion, the controversy and scrutiny the Wikipedia project has come under may have one very priceless effect. People may realize they need to approach everything they read with a critical mind instead of blind consumption.
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Gorilla For This Useful Post:
DBlack (September 18th, 2007)

 
Old September 18th, 2007, 10:26 AM   #9 (permalink)
DBlack
Founder

 
DBlack's Avatar
 
DBlack is offline
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 7,558
Thanks: 328
Thanked 1,324 Times in 715 Posts
DBlack has a reputation beyond reputeDBlack has a reputation beyond reputeDBlack has a reputation beyond reputeDBlack has a reputation beyond reputeDBlack has a reputation beyond reputeDBlack has a reputation beyond reputeDBlack has a reputation beyond reputeDBlack has a reputation beyond reputeDBlack has a reputation beyond reputeDBlack has a reputation beyond reputeDBlack has a reputation beyond repute
Rep Power: 191
Credits: 377,101
Gorilla made an excellent argument on this issue, so I can't really add much.

I will say that in my experience teachers are consistently on the wrong side of technology, particularly the web, and it's use. why would a teacher encourage their students to use Wiki, it would make them less of a reliable source?

While teachers blast the open source methodology of Wiki, they fail to suggest a better alternative. Print media and proprietary college databases of information are by no means a viable alternative to the sheer information power of Wiki.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

 
Old September 18th, 2007, 12:03 PM   #10 (permalink)
Great Ursus
Afr0 Resident
Emerging Voice
 
Great Ursus is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Norf
Posts: 259
Thanks: 232
Thanked 61 Times in 35 Posts
Great Ursus will become famous soon enough
Rep Power: 0
Credits: 1,682
Quote:
Originally Posted by DBlack View Post
Gorilla made an excellent argument on this issue, so I can't really add much.

I will say that in my experience teachers are consistently on the wrong side of technology, particularly the web, and it's use. why would a teacher encourage their students to use Wiki, it would make them less of a reliable source?

While teachers blast the open source methodology of Wiki, they fail to suggest a better alternative. Print media and proprietary college databases of information are by no means a viable alternative to the sheer information power of Wiki.
Just to hammer this issue out some more and give out a few headaches ;) , how difficult would it be to deny such easy access to Wiki's data being altered? It seems to me that a viable and dependable database is only as far away as some consistent and dependable editing of info. Wouldn't that actually make the database smaller by ruthless adhearence to historical or proven truth?
If Senator So&So tries to place what would amount to an ad designed to increase his favor, just kick that crap out of the system. Pure facts is all I really require in referencing, with this a general idea of the subject's popularity/integrity/schizms will come forth.
donchathink?
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:15 PM.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.0.0



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46