Jump to content

Wikipedia: Difference between revisions

From Consumer Rights Wiki
← Older edit
VisualWikitext
Removed deletionism and hostility against newcomers as these seem like moderation problems for a community, and not relevant to consumer rights. Also removed certain claims in the name and shame section due to being original authorial opinion unsupported by the citations given (citations present were only showing the page, not actually supporting the claim made)
No edit summary
 
(12 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Incomplete|Issue 1=references need to utilize [[Template:Cite web]]}}
{{Delete|See [[Consumer Rights Wiki talk:Moderators' noticeboard#Appeal request for Wikipedia article]].}}
{{InfoboxCompany
{{ProductCargo
| Name = Wikipedia
|ArticleType=Product
| Type = Private
|Category=Education
| Founded = 2001
|Company=Wikimedia Foundation
| Industry = Web encyclopedia
|Description=Internet encyclopedia following the "wiki" philosophy of collaborative editing.
| Logo = Wikipedia.svg
|InProduction=Yes
| Official Website = https://wikipedia.org/
|Logo=Wikipedia.svg
|ProductLine=
|ReleaseYear=2001
|Website=https://wikipedia.org/
}}
}}
'''Wikipedia''' is a digital encyclopedic platform which was founded in 2001 and is currently operated by American non-profit organization Wikimedia Foundation.
'''Wikipedia''' is a digital encyclopedic platform which was founded in 2001 and is currently operated by American non-profit organization Wikimedia Foundation.


==Consumer-impact summary==
==Consumer impact summary==
The encyclopedia is a major destination for consumers/readers to access information about any given topics, ranging from natural sciences to political fields. Theoretically, the encyclopedia is open for editing by anyone, meaning that consumers/readers can become producers/editors at any time.<ref>{{cite web |last1=McGrady |first1=Ryan |title=What Attacks on Wikipedia Reveal about Free Expression {{!}} TechPolicy.Press |url=https://www.techpolicy.press/what-attacks-on-wikipedia-reveal-about-free-expression/ |website=Tech Policy Press |access-date=21 November 2025 |language=en |date=14 May 2025}}</ref>
The encyclopedia is a major destination for readers to access information about any given topics, ranging from natural sciences to political fields. Theoretically, the encyclopedia is open for editing by anyone, meaning that readers can become producers and editors at any time.<ref>{{Cite web |last=McGrady |first=Ryan |title=What Attacks on Wikipedia Reveal about Free Expression |url=https://www.techpolicy.press/what-attacks-on-wikipedia-reveal-about-free-expression/ |website=Tech Policy Press |date=14 May 2025 |access-date=21 November 2025 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250514214522/https://www.techpolicy.press/what-attacks-on-wikipedia-reveal-about-free-expression/ |archive-date=14 May 2025}}</ref>


===Monopoly===
===Monopoly===
Although Wikipedia formally enshrines the right to fork contents from them in order to start a new encyclopedia, it has been reported that Wikipedia effectively operated as a ''de facto'' monopoly among online encyclopedias for a long time, and Wikipedia had received privileged positions by various search engines such as [[Google]] on their search results. Social media service [[TikTok]] included similar information from Wikipedia in their search results. Besides that, Wikipedia is one of the top sources for AI chatbots.<ref>{{cite web |title=Wikipedia:Content forks |url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:PROJFORK |website=Wikipedia |access-date=21 November 2025 |language=en |date=16 October 2025}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Introducing Justapedia |url=https://quillette.com/2023/12/11/introducing-justapedia/ |website=Quillette |access-date=21 November 2025 |language=en |date=11 December 2023}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Sato |first1=Mia |title=TikTok has quietly been inserting Wikipedia snippets into search results |url=https://www.theverge.com/2023/9/13/23871880/tiktok-search-engine-wikipedia-snippets-google |website=The Verge |access-date=21 November 2025 |date=13 September 2023}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Schaul |first1=Kevin |last2=Chen |first2=Szu Yu |last3=Tiku |first3=Nitasha |title=Inside the secret list of websites that make AI like ChatGPT sound smart |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/interactive/2023/ai-chatbot-learning/ |website=Washington Post |access-date=21 November 2025 |language=en}}</ref>
Although Wikipedia formally enshrines the right to fork contents from them in order to start a new encyclopedia, it has been reported that Wikipedia effectively operated as a ''de facto'' monopoly among online encyclopedias for a long time, and Wikipedia had received privileged positions by various search engines such as [[Google]] on their search results. Social media service [[TikTok]] included similar information from Wikipedia in their search results. Besides that, Wikipedia is one of the top sources for AI chatbots.<ref>{{Cite web |author= |title=Wikipedia:Content forks |url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:PROJFORK |website=Wikipedia |date=16 October 2025 |access-date=21 November 2025 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251019182549/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Content_forks#Project-level_content_forks |archive-date=19 Oct 2025}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Tezuka |first=Shuichi |title=Introducing Justapedia |url=https://quillette.com/2023/12/11/introducing-justapedia/ |website=Quillette |date=11 December 2023 |access-date=21 November 2025 |url-status=live |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260114054827/https://quillette.com/2023/12/11/introducing-justapedia/ |archive-date=14 Jan 2026}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Sato |first=Mia |title=TikTok has quietly been inserting Wikipedia snippets into search results |url=https://www.theverge.com/2023/9/13/23871880/tiktok-search-engine-wikipedia-snippets-google |website=The Verge |date=13 Sep 2023 |access-date=21 Nov 2025 |url-status=live |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260101232819/https://www.theverge.com/2023/9/13/23871880/tiktok-search-engine-wikipedia-snippets-google |archive-date=1 Jan 2026}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last1=Schaul |first1=Kevin |last2=Chen |first2=Szu Yu |last3=Tiku |first3=Nitasha |title=Inside the secret list of websites that make AI like ChatGPT sound smart |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/interactive/2023/ai-chatbot-learning/ |website=The Washington Post |date=19 Apr 2023 |access-date=15 Feb 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230419120558/https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/interactive/2023/ai-chatbot-learning/ |archive-date=19 Apr 2023}}</ref>


Consequently, Wikipedia's monopoly had generated significant downstream effects where Wikipedia had played crucial roles in shaping medical decisions, economic outcomes, scientific publications, and perhaps judicial rulings.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Beck |first1=Julie |title=Doctors’ #1 Source for Healthcare Information: Wikipedia |url=https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/03/doctors-1-source-for-healthcare-information-wikipedia/284206/ |website=The Atlantic |access-date=21 November 2025 |language=en |date=5 March 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Hinnosaar |first1=Marit |last2=Hinnosaar |first2=Toomas |last3=Kummer |first3=Michael |last4=Slivko |first4=Olga |title=Wikipedia matters |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jems.12421 |website=Journal of Economics & Management Strategy |access-date=21 November 2025 |pages=657–669 |language=en |doi=10.1111/jems.12421 |date=2023}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Neil |first1=Thompson, |last2=Douglas |first2=Hanley, |title=Science Is Shaped by Wikipedia: Evidence From a Randomized Control Trial |url=https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3039505 |access-date=21 November 2025 |language=en |doi=10.2139/ |date=13 February 2018}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Trial by Internet: A Randomized Field Experiment on Wikipedia’s Influence on Judges’ Legal Reasoning |url=https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4174200 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |access-date=21 November 2025}}</ref> Wikipedia is even included among longtermist knowledge preservation initiatives such as the Arch Mission's The LEO (Low Earth Orbit) library, The Lunar Library I on the failed Beresheet lunar lander, The Lunar Library II on the failed Astrobotic Peregrine lander, The Galactic Legacy Archive on a successful Intuitive Machines moon lander mission, and The Pyramid Library on the successful Firefly Aerospace’s Blue Ghost lander mission.<ref>{{cite web |title=The LEO Library: Constellation 1 |url=https://www.archmission.org/leo-library-1 |website=Arch Mission Foundation - Preserving humanity forever, in space and on Earth. |access-date=21 November 2025}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=The Lunar Library: Genesis |url=https://www.archmission.org/spaceil |website=Arch Mission Foundation - Preserving humanity forever, in space and on Earth.}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Lunar Library II |url=https://www.archmission.org/lunar-library-2 |website=Arch Mission Foundation - Preserving humanity forever, in space and on Earth.}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Galactic Legacy Archive |url=https://www.archmission.org/galactic-legacy-archive |website=Arch Mission Foundation - Preserving humanity forever, in space and on Earth.}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Galactic Legacy Archive |url=https://www.archmission.org/galactic-legacy-archive |website=Arch Mission Foundation - Preserving humanity forever, in space and on Earth. |access-date=21 November 2025}}</ref>
Consequently, Wikipedia's monopoly had generated significant downstream effects where Wikipedia had played crucial roles in shaping medical decisions, economic outcomes, scientific publications, and perhaps judicial rulings.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Beck |first=Julie |title=Doctors’ #1 Source for Healthcare Information: Wikipedia |url=https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/03/doctors-1-source-for-healthcare-information-wikipedia/284206/ |website=The Atlantic |date=5 Mar 2014 |access-date=21 Nov 2025 |url-status=live |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260202220730/https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/03/doctors-1-source-for-healthcare-information-wikipedia/284206/ |archive-date=2 Feb 2026}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last1=Hinnosaar |first1=Marit |last2=Hinnosaar |first2=Toomas |last3=Kummer |first3=Michael |last4=Slivko |first4=Olga |title=Wikipedia matters |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jems.12421 |url-access=limited |website=Journal of Economics & Management Strategy |date=10 Mar 2021 |access-date=15 Feb 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240709001458/https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jems.12421 |archive-date=9 Jul 2024 |pages=657–669 |doi=10.1111/jems.12421 |format=PDF
}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last1=Neil |first1=Thompson |last2=Douglas |first2=Hanley |title=Science Is Shaped by Wikipedia: Evidence From a Randomized Control Trial |url=https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3039505 |website=Social Science Research Network |date=13 Feb 2018 |access-date=21 Nov 2025 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180601232442/https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3039505 |archive-date=1 Jun 2018 |doi=10.2139/ssrn.3039505}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last1=Thompson |first1=Neil |last2=Flanagan |first2=Brian |last3=Richardson |first3=Edana |last4=McKenzie |first4=Brian |last5=Luo |first5=Xueyun |display-authors=2 |title=Trial by Internet: A Randomized Field Experiment on Wikipedia’s Influence on Judges’ Legal Reasoning |url=https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4174200 |website=Social Science Research Network |date=1 Aug 2022 |access-date=21 Nov 2025 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251120010359/https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4174200 |archive-date=20 Nov 2025}}</ref> Wikipedia is even included among long-termist knowledge preservation initiatives such as the Arch Mission's The LEO (Low Earth Orbit) library, The Lunar Library I on the failed Beresheet lunar lander, The Lunar Library II on the failed Astrobotic Peregrine lander, The Galactic Legacy Archive on a successful Intuitive Machines moon lander mission, and The Pyramid Library on the successful Firefly Aerospace's Blue Ghost lander mission.<ref>{{Cite web |author= |title=The LEO Library: Constellation 1 |url=https://www.archmission.org/leo-library-1 |website=Arch Mission Foundation |date= |access-date=15 Feb 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250930044527/https://www.archmission.org/leo-library-1 |archive-date=30 Sep 2025}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |author= |title=The Lunar Library: Genesis |url=https://www.archmission.org/spaceil |website=Arch Mission Foundation |date= |access-date=15 Feb 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260215212645/https://www.archmission.org/spaceil |archive-date=15 Feb 2026}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |author= |title=Lunar Library II |url=https://www.archmission.org/lunar-library-2 |website=Arch Mission Foundation |date= |access-date=15 Feb 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241224161609/https://www.archmission.org/lunar-library-2 |archive-date=24 Dec 2024}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |author= |title=Galactic Legacy Archive |url=https://www.archmission.org/galactic-legacy-archive |website=Arch Mission Foundation |date= |access-date=15 Feb 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260217175117/https://www.archmission.org/galactic-legacy-archive |archive-date=17 Feb 2026}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |author= |title=Galactic Legacy Archive |url=https://www.archmission.org/galactic-legacy-archive |website=Arch Mission Foundation |date= |access-date=21 Nov 2025 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240113231855/https://www.archmission.org/galactic-legacy-archive |archive-date=13 Jan 2024}}</ref>


==Incidents==
==Incidents==
This is a list of all incidents, especially those related to consumer protection, that this platform is involved in. Any incidents not mentioned here can be found in the [[:Category:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|{{PAGENAME}} category]].
This is a list of all incidents, especially those related to consumer protection, that this platform is involved in. Any incidents not mentioned here can be found in the [[:Category:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|{{PAGENAME}} category]].
==="Name and shame" pages===
On Wikipedia, there are publicly-visible "name and shame" pages such as "Sockpuppet investigation" casepages (SPI) and Long-term abuse pages (LTA) whose ostensible aims are for assisting anti-vandalism purposes.<ref>{{cite web |title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations |url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations |website=Wikipedia |access-date=21 November 2025 |language=en |date=7 November 2025}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Wikipedia:Long-term abuse |url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse |website=Wikipedia |access-date=21 November 2025 |language=en |date=20 October 2025}}</ref> Pages in the latter category often contain personally-identifiable attributes of users who're branded as "long term abusers" (LTA) for supposedly engaging in disruptions against the Wikipedia over a long period, including IP addresses, full legal names.


===Orangemoody scandal===
===Orangemoody scandal===
On September 2015, Wikipedia was hit by the Orangemoody blackmail scandal, as it came to light that hundreds of businesses and minor celebrities had faced demands for payment from rogue editors to publish, protect or update Wikipedia articles on them.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/wikipedia-rocked-by-rogue-editors-blackmail-scam-targeting-small-businesses-and-celebrities-10481993.html|title=Wikipedia rocked by 'rogue editors' blackmail scam targeting small businesses and celebrities|last=Merrill|first=Jamie|work=[[The Independent]]|date=September 2, 2015|access-date=September 3, 2017|archive-date=September 13, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150913220528/http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/wikipedia-rocked-by-rogue-editors-blackmail-scam-targeting-small-businesses-and-celebrities-10481993.html|url-status=live}}</ref>
In September 2015, Wikipedia was hit by the Orangemoody blackmail scandal, as it came to light that hundreds of businesses and minor celebrities had faced demands for payment from rogue editors to publish, protect or update Wikipedia articles on them.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Merrill |first=Jamie |last2=Owen |first2=Jonathan |title=Wikipedia rocked by 'rogue editors' blackmail scam targeting small businesses and celebrities |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/wikipedia-rocked-by-rogue-editors-blackmail-scam-targeting-small-businesses-and-celebrities-10481993.html |website=The Independent |date=2 Sep 2015 |access-date=15 Feb 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150913220528/https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/wikipedia-rocked-by-rogue-editors-blackmail-scam-targeting-small-businesses-and-celebrities-10481993.html |archive-date=13 Sep 2015}}</ref>


===Scots Wikipedia scandal===
===Scots Wikipedia scandal===
On August 2020, a Reddit user publicized that a prolific Scots Wikipedia administrator did not speak the Scots language; tens of thousands of articles were in fact English with eye dialect spellings to suggest a Scottish accent, or word-by-word machine translations of articles from English Wikipedia. Wikimedia users debated recruiting fluent speakers of Scots to repair the articles, reverting all edits from the administrator in question, or – as the latter would entail removing nearly half the articles in the encyclopedia – even deleting and restarting Scots Wikipedia afresh. ''The Guardian'' attributed the problem to systemic issues in Wikipedia culture, suggesting that some administrators are afforded effectively unchecked power based on sheer volume of edits (rather than the quality of their work). Robyn Speer, chief scientist at Luminoso, expressed concern that artificial intelligence corpora which used Wikipedia for language-training data had been corrupted by the pseudo-Scots.<ref name="inews">{{cite web |last1=McDonald |first1=Karl |title=Scots Wikipedia taken over by American teenager who wrote thousands of 'very odd' articles without learning language |url=https://inews.co.uk/news/scotland/scots-wikipedia-language-articles-native-speaker-mistakes-610689 |website=inews.co.uk |access-date=August 26, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200826132225/https://inews.co.uk/news/scotland/scots-wikipedia-language-articles-native-speaker-mistakes-610689 |archive-date=August 26, 2020 |language=en |date=August 26, 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Brooks |first1=Libby |last2=Hern |first2=Alex |title=Shock an aw: US teenager wrote huge slice of Scots Wikipedia |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/aug/26/shock-an-aw-us-teenager-wrote-huge-slice-of-scots-wikipedia |website=[[The Guardian]] |access-date=August 26, 2020 |date=August 26, 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=McCarthy |first1=Kieren |title=Um, almost the entire Scots Wikipedia was written by someone with no idea of the language – 10,000s of articles |url=https://www.theregister.com/2020/08/26/scots_wikipedia_fake/ |website=[[The Register]] |access-date=August 26, 2020 |language=en |date=August 26, 2020}}</ref>
In August 2020, a [[Reddit]] user publicized that a prolific Scots Wikipedia administrator did not speak the Scots language; tens of thousands of articles were in fact English with eye dialect spellings to suggest a Scottish accent, or word-by-word machine translations of articles from the English Wikipedia. Wikimedia users debated recruiting fluent speakers of Scots to repair the articles, reverting all edits from the administrator in question, or — as the latter would entail removing nearly half the articles in the encyclopedia — even deleting and restarting Scots Wikipedia afresh. ''The Guardian'' attributed the problem to systemic issues in Wikipedia culture, suggesting that some administrators are afforded effectively unchecked power based on sheer volume of edits (rather than the quality of their work). Robyn Speer, chief scientist at Luminoso, expressed concern that artificial intelligence corpora which used Wikipedia for language-training data had been corrupted by the pseudo-Scots.<ref name="inews">{{Cite web |last=McDonald |first=Karl |title=Scots Wikipedia taken over by American teenager who wrote thousands of 'very odd' articles without learning language |url=https://inews.co.uk/news/scotland/scots-wikipedia-language-articles-native-speaker-mistakes-610689 |website=The i Paper |date=26 Aug 2020 |access-date=15 Feb 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200826132225/https://inews.co.uk/news/scotland/scots-wikipedia-language-articles-native-speaker-mistakes-610689 |archive-date=26 Aug 2020}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last1=Brooks |first1=Libby |last2=Hern |first2=Alex |date=26 Aug 2020 |title=Shock an aw: US teenager wrote huge slice of Scots Wikipedia <!-- sic. --> |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/aug/26/shock-an-aw-us-teenager-wrote-huge-slice-of-scots-wikipedia |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200826163024/https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/aug/26/shock-an-aw-us-teenager-wrote-huge-slice-of-scots-wikipedia |archive-date=26 Aug 2020 |access-date=15 Feb 2026 |website=The Guardian}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=McCarthy |first=Kieren |title=Um, almost the entire Scots Wikipedia was written by someone with no idea of the language – 10,000s of articles |url=https://www.theregister.com/2020/08/26/scots_wikipedia_fake/ |website=The Register |date=26 Aug 2020 |access-date=15 Feb 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260211102214/https://www.theregister.com/2020/08/26/scots_wikipedia_fake/ |archive-date=11 Feb 2026}}</ref>


==References==
==References==
{{reflist}}
{{Reflist}}


[[Category:Wikipedia]]
[[Category:{{PAGENAME}}]]

Latest revision as of 16:34, 18 March 2026

⚠️ A deletion request has been made for this article

There has been a deletion request for this page for the following reason:

See Consumer Rights Wiki talk:Moderators' noticeboard#Appeal request for Wikipedia article.

This request will be reviewed and acted upon by the wiki moderation team within one week of the template being added.

To appeal this deletion request, please make an entry at the Moderator's noticeboard.


Wikipedia
Basic Information
Release Year 2001
Product Type Education
In Production Yes
Official Website https://wikipedia.org/

Wikipedia is a digital encyclopedic platform which was founded in 2001 and is currently operated by American non-profit organization Wikimedia Foundation.

Consumer impact summary

[edit | edit source]

The encyclopedia is a major destination for readers to access information about any given topics, ranging from natural sciences to political fields. Theoretically, the encyclopedia is open for editing by anyone, meaning that readers can become producers and editors at any time.[1]

Monopoly

[edit | edit source]

Although Wikipedia formally enshrines the right to fork contents from them in order to start a new encyclopedia, it has been reported that Wikipedia effectively operated as a de facto monopoly among online encyclopedias for a long time, and Wikipedia had received privileged positions by various search engines such as Google on their search results. Social media service TikTok included similar information from Wikipedia in their search results. Besides that, Wikipedia is one of the top sources for AI chatbots.[2][3][4][5]

Consequently, Wikipedia's monopoly had generated significant downstream effects where Wikipedia had played crucial roles in shaping medical decisions, economic outcomes, scientific publications, and perhaps judicial rulings.[6][7][8][9] Wikipedia is even included among long-termist knowledge preservation initiatives such as the Arch Mission's The LEO (Low Earth Orbit) library, The Lunar Library I on the failed Beresheet lunar lander, The Lunar Library II on the failed Astrobotic Peregrine lander, The Galactic Legacy Archive on a successful Intuitive Machines moon lander mission, and The Pyramid Library on the successful Firefly Aerospace's Blue Ghost lander mission.[10][11][12][13][14]

Incidents

[edit | edit source]

This is a list of all incidents, especially those related to consumer protection, that this platform is involved in. Any incidents not mentioned here can be found in the Wikipedia category.

Orangemoody scandal

[edit | edit source]

In September 2015, Wikipedia was hit by the Orangemoody blackmail scandal, as it came to light that hundreds of businesses and minor celebrities had faced demands for payment from rogue editors to publish, protect or update Wikipedia articles on them.[15]

Scots Wikipedia scandal

[edit | edit source]

In August 2020, a Reddit user publicized that a prolific Scots Wikipedia administrator did not speak the Scots language; tens of thousands of articles were in fact English with eye dialect spellings to suggest a Scottish accent, or word-by-word machine translations of articles from the English Wikipedia. Wikimedia users debated recruiting fluent speakers of Scots to repair the articles, reverting all edits from the administrator in question, or — as the latter would entail removing nearly half the articles in the encyclopedia — even deleting and restarting Scots Wikipedia afresh. The Guardian attributed the problem to systemic issues in Wikipedia culture, suggesting that some administrators are afforded effectively unchecked power based on sheer volume of edits (rather than the quality of their work). Robyn Speer, chief scientist at Luminoso, expressed concern that artificial intelligence corpora which used Wikipedia for language-training data had been corrupted by the pseudo-Scots.[16][17][18]

References

[edit | edit source]
  1. ↑ McGrady, Ryan (14 May 2025). "What Attacks on Wikipedia Reveal about Free Expression". Tech Policy Press. Archived from the original on 14 May 2025. Retrieved 21 November 2025.
  2. ↑ "Wikipedia:Content forks". Wikipedia. 16 October 2025. Archived from the original on 19 Oct 2025. Retrieved 21 November 2025.
  3. ↑ Tezuka, Shuichi (11 December 2023). "Introducing Justapedia". Quillette. Archived from the original on 14 Jan 2026. Retrieved 21 November 2025.
  4. ↑ Sato, Mia (13 Sep 2023). "TikTok has quietly been inserting Wikipedia snippets into search results". The Verge. Archived from the original on 1 Jan 2026. Retrieved 21 Nov 2025.
  5. ↑ Schaul, Kevin; Chen, Szu Yu; Tiku, Nitasha (19 Apr 2023). "Inside the secret list of websites that make AI like ChatGPT sound smart". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on 19 Apr 2023. Retrieved 15 Feb 2026.
  6. ↑ Beck, Julie (5 Mar 2014). "Doctors' #1 Source for Healthcare Information: Wikipedia". The Atlantic. Archived from the original on 2 Feb 2026. Retrieved 21 Nov 2025.
  7. ↑ Hinnosaar, Marit; Hinnosaar, Toomas; Kummer, Michael; Slivko, Olga (10 Mar 2021). "Wikipedia matters" (PDF). Journal of Economics & Management Strategy. pp. 657–669. doi:10.1111/jems.12421. Archived from the original on 9 Jul 2024. Retrieved 15 Feb 2026.
  8. ↑ Neil, Thompson; Douglas, Hanley (13 Feb 2018). "Science Is Shaped by Wikipedia: Evidence From a Randomized Control Trial". Social Science Research Network. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3039505. Archived from the original on 1 Jun 2018. Retrieved 21 Nov 2025.
  9. ↑ Thompson, Neil; Flanagan, Brian; et al. (1 Aug 2022). "Trial by Internet: A Randomized Field Experiment on Wikipedia's Influence on Judges' Legal Reasoning". Social Science Research Network. Archived from the original on 20 Nov 2025. Retrieved 21 Nov 2025.
  10. ↑ "The LEO Library: Constellation 1". Arch Mission Foundation. Archived from the original on 30 Sep 2025. Retrieved 15 Feb 2026.
  11. ↑ "The Lunar Library: Genesis". Arch Mission Foundation. Archived from the original on 15 Feb 2026. Retrieved 15 Feb 2026.
  12. ↑ "Lunar Library II". Arch Mission Foundation. Archived from the original on 24 Dec 2024. Retrieved 15 Feb 2026.
  13. ↑ "Galactic Legacy Archive". Arch Mission Foundation. Archived from the original on 17 Feb 2026. Retrieved 15 Feb 2026.
  14. ↑ "Galactic Legacy Archive". Arch Mission Foundation. Archived from the original on 13 Jan 2024. Retrieved 21 Nov 2025.
  15. ↑ Merrill, Jamie; Owen, Jonathan (2 Sep 2015). "Wikipedia rocked by 'rogue editors' blackmail scam targeting small businesses and celebrities". The Independent. Archived from the original on 13 Sep 2015. Retrieved 15 Feb 2026.
  16. ↑ McDonald, Karl (26 Aug 2020). "Scots Wikipedia taken over by American teenager who wrote thousands of 'very odd' articles without learning language". The i Paper. Archived from the original on 26 Aug 2020. Retrieved 15 Feb 2026.
  17. ↑ Brooks, Libby; Hern, Alex (26 Aug 2020). "Shock an aw: US teenager wrote huge slice of Scots Wikipedia". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 26 Aug 2020. Retrieved 15 Feb 2026.
  18. ↑ McCarthy, Kieren (26 Aug 2020). "Um, almost the entire Scots Wikipedia was written by someone with no idea of the language – 10,000s of articles". The Register. Archived from the original on 11 Feb 2026. Retrieved 15 Feb 2026.
Retrieved from "https://mirror.consumerrights.wiki/index.php?title=Wikipedia&oldid=44682"