wikipediocracy

Wikipediocracy was cofounded by Gregory Kohs{{cite web | url=https://www.foxnews.com/tech/wikipedia-abandons-efforts-to-purge-porn-from-online-encyclopedia | title=Wikipedia abandons efforts to purge porn from online encyclopedia | website=Fox News | date=25 March 2015 }} after Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales blocked him from editing Wikipedia, for starting MyWikiBiz, a business that offered to create Wikipedia articles for a fee.{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=M1yNL0iI5T0C&dq=Gregory%20%22Kohs%22%20%22mywikibiz%22&pg=PA142 |title=Notions of Community: A Collection of Community Media Debates and Dilemmas |year=2009 |editor-last=Gordon |editor-first=Janey |author-last=Stewart |author-first=Gavin |contribution=Selling Community: Corporate Media, Marketing and Blogging |page=142 |publisher=Peter Lang |isbn=9783039113743}}{{cite web |last=Read |first=Brock |date=24 January 2007 |title=Wikipedia Blocks a Pay-for-Play Scheme |url=http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/wikipedia-blocks-a-pay-for-play-scheme/2796 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120523170842/http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/wikipedia-blocks-a-pay-for-play-scheme/2796 |archive-date=23 May 2012 |access-date=13 February 2012 |work=The Chronicle of Higher Education}}

• {{cite press release |title=Wikipedia – Open For Business |date=8 August 2006 |publisher=24-7pressrelease.com |url=http://www.24-7pressrelease.com/view_press_release.php?rID=16892 |access-date=13 February 2012 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120204090918/http://www.24-7pressrelease.com/view_press_release.php?rID=16892 |archive-date=4 February 2012}}

Wikipediocracy contributors have investigated problems, conflicts, and controversies associated with Wikipedia, some being reported by mainstream media. The site's stated mission is "to shine the light of scrutiny into the dark crevices of Wikipedia" and related projects. In a doctoral thesis, internet policy and law specialist Heather Ford wrote that "as Wikipedia's authority grows, and more groups feel disenfranchised by its processes, the growth of watchdog groups like Wikipediocracy who act as translators of Wikipedia's complex structures, rules and norms for mainstream media and who begin to give voice to those who feel that they have been excluded from Wikipedia's representational structures will continue."Ford, Heather, "[https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282643334_Fact_factories_Wikipedia_and_the_power_to_represent Fact factories: Wikipedia and the power to represent]", Kellogg College, Oxford, August 2015, DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.4068.9361 {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151126113811/http://www.researchgate.net/publication/282643334_Fact_factories_Wikipedia_and_the_power_to_represent |date=26 November 2015 }}

In 2013, Wikipediocracy members contacted Salon.com reporter Andrew Leonard to alert him about the "Qworty fiasco".{{cite web|title=Qworty: the fallout|url=http://wikipediocracy.com/2013/05/24/qworty-the-fallout/|website=Wikipediocracy|access-date=4 September 2015|archive-date=26 December 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191226095603/http://wikipediocracy.com/2013/05/24/qworty-the-fallout/|url-status=live}} Wikipedia user Qworty had attracted attention for his provocative comments in a debate on Wikipedia's treatment of female writers.{{cite web|last1=Leonard|first1=Andrew|title=Wikipedia's Shame|url=http://www.salon.com/2013/04/29/wikipedias_shame/|website=Salon|date=29 April 2013|access-date=4 September 2015|archive-date=30 April 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130430063012/http://www.salon.com/2013/04/29/wikipedias_shame/|url-status=live}} It emerged that many of his past contributions affected the site's treatment of, and targeted rivals of, writer Robert Clark Young.{{cite web|last=Leonard|first=Andrew|work=Salon.com|title=Revenge, ego and the corruption of Wikipedia|date=17 May 2013|access-date=18 May 2013|url=http://www.salon.com/2013/05/17/revenge_ego_and_the_corruption_of_wikipedia/|archive-date=31 May 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160531215546/http://www.salon.com/2013/05/17/revenge_ego_and_the_corruption_of_wikipedia/|url-status=live}}{{cite news |last=Manhire |first=Toby |author-link=Toby Manhire |url=https://www.noted.co.nz/archive/archive-listener-nz-2013/wikipedia-and-the-scourge-of-revenge-editors |title=Wikipedia and the scourge of "revenge editors" |magazine=New Zealand Listener |date=5 June 2013 |access-date=5 June 2013 |archive-date=21 April 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200421065837/https://www.noted.co.nz/archive/archive-listener-nz-2013/wikipedia-and-the-scourge-of-revenge-editors |url-status=live }} This background information led to Leonard's challenging Young in an article "Revenge, Ego, and the Corruption of Wikipedia", which identified Young as Qworty. Just before the publication of Leonard's article, Qworty had been banned from editing Wikipedia biographies of living persons due to this behavior.{{cite web|url=http://talkingwriting.com/what-should-we-do-about-wikipedia/|title=What Should We Do About Wikipedia?|last1=Nichols|first1=Martha|last2=Berry|first2=Lorraine|publisher=Talking Writing|date=20 May 2013|access-date=20 May 2013|archive-date=1 January 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200101174130/http://talkingwriting.com/what-should-we-do-about-wikipedia/|url-status=live}}

Wikipediocracy contributors' criticisms of Wikipedia have been discussed in news stories covering Jimmy Wales's relationship with the government of Kazakhstan,{{cite web |url = http://www.dailydot.com/politics/wikipedia-kazakhstan-dictatorship/ |title = Wikipedia's odd relationship with the Kazakh dictatorship |last = Morris |first = Kevin |date = 25 December 2012 |website = The Daily Dot |access-date = 18 May 2013 |archive-date = 25 May 2016 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20160525060031/http://www.dailydot.com/politics/wikipedia-kazakhstan-dictatorship/ |url-status = live }}{{cite web |url = http://netprophet.tol.org/2013/01/08/critics-question-neutrality-of-kazakh-wikipedia/ |title = Critics question neutrality of Kazakh Wikipedia |last = Hermans |first = Steven |date = 8 January 2013 |website = NET PROPHET |access-date = 26 May 2013 |archive-date = 28 April 2019 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20190428202345/http://netprophet.tol.org/2013/01/08/critics-question-neutrality-of-kazakh-wikipedia/ |url-status = dead }}{{cite web |url = https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wikipedia/9764719/Wikipedia-co-founder-Jimmy-Wales-restricts-discussion-of-Tony-Blair-friendship.html |title = Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales restricts discussion of Tony Blair friendship |last = Williams |first = Christopher |date = 24 December 2012 |work = The Telegraph |access-date = 26 May 2013 |archive-date = 17 August 2019 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20190817033031/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wikipedia/9764719/Wikipedia-co-founder-Jimmy-Wales-restricts-discussion-of-Tony-Blair-friendship.html |url-status = live }} the Gibraltarpedia controversy,{{cite web |url = http://www.dailydot.com/news/wikipedia-jimmy-wales-influence-scandal/ |title = Wikipedia's Jimmy Wales breaks silence on resurgence of influence-peddling scandal |last = Alfonso |first = Fernando |date = 25 October 2012 |website = The Daily Dot |access-date = 18 May 2013 |archive-date = 29 October 2013 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20131029183926/http://www.dailydot.com/news/wikipedia-jimmy-wales-influence-scandal/ |url-status = live }}{{cite web|url=https://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/26/gibraltar_pwns_wikipedia/|title=Wales: Let's ban Gibraltar-crazy Wikipedians for 5 years|publisher=The Register|first=Andrew|last=Orlowski|author-link=Andrew Orlowski|date=26 October 2012|access-date=19 May 2013|archive-date=1 January 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200101174115/https://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/26/gibraltar_pwns_wikipedia/|url-status=live}} and an anonymous edit made from a U.S. Senate IP address that labelled whistle-blower Edward Snowden a "traitor".{{cite web|first=Joe|last=Kloc|title=Is a U.S. senator trolling Snowden's Wikipedia page?|website=The Daily Dot|url=http://www.dailydot.com/politics/wikipedia-senate-snowden-nsa-traitor/|date=3 August 2013|access-date=4 September 2013|archive-date=7 March 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160307211929/http://www.dailydot.com/politics/wikipedia-senate-snowden-nsa-traitor/|url-status=live}}{{cite web|first=Lorenzo|last=Franceschi-Bicchierai|title=Wikipedia Editor Traced to U.S. Senate Changes Snowden's Bio to 'Traitor'|website=Mashable|url=http://mashable.com/2013/08/06/snowden-wikipedia-page/|date=6 August 2013|access-date=4 September 2013|archive-date=1 January 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200101174128/https://mashable.com/2013/08/06/snowden-wikipedia-page/|url-status=live}}

In May 2014, The Telegraph, working with Wikipediocracy, uncovered evidence identifying the civil servant who had allegedly vandalized the Wikipedia articles on the Hillsborough disaster and Anfield.{{cite web | url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/10844002/Civil-servants-behind-sickening-Hillsborough-slurs-identified.html | title=Civil servants behind 'sickening' Hillsborough slurs identified | first=Oliver | last=Duggan | date=21 May 2014 | work=The Daily Telegraph | access-date=21 June 2014 | archive-date=1 January 2020 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200101180641/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/10844002/Civil-servants-behind-sickening-Hillsborough-slurs-identified.html | url-status=live }}
{{cite web | url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/hillsborough-wikipedia-posts-suspected-civil-servant-a-merseyside-resident-9413069.html | title=Hillsborough Wikipedia posts: Suspected civil servant a Merseyside resident | first=Kashmira | last=Gander | date=21 May 2014 | work=The Independent | access-date=21 June 2014 | archive-date=1 January 2020 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200101174117/https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/hillsborough-wikipedia-posts-suspected-civil-servant-a-merseyside-resident-9413069.html | url-status=live }}
{{cite web|first=Oliver|last=Duggan|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/10904540/Civil-servant-fired-after-Telegraph-investigation-into-Hillsborough-Wikipedia-slurs.html|title=Civil servant fired after Telegraph investigation into Hillsborough Wikipedia slurs|work=The Daily Telegraph|date=17 June 2014|access-date=21 June 2014|archive-date=5 January 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200105021357/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/10904540/Civil-servant-fired-after-Telegraph-investigation-into-Hillsborough-Wikipedia-slurs.html|url-status=live}}
{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jun/17/civil-servant-sacked-wikipedia-edits-hillsborough|first=Mark|last=Tran|work=The Guardian|title=Civil servant sacked for offensive Wikipedia edits on Hillsborough|date=17 June 2014|access-date=17 June 2014|archive-date=17 June 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140617104603/http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jun/17/civil-servant-sacked-wikipedia-edits-hillsborough|url-status=live}}
{{cite web | url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/10905847/How-The-Telegraph-identified-the-Hillsborough-Wikipedia-vandal.html | title=How The Telegraph identified the Hillsborough Wikipedia vandal | first=Oliver | last=Duggan | date=17 June 2014 | work=The Daily Telegraph | access-date=21 June 2014 | archive-date=25 December 2019 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191225142800/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/10905847/How-The-Telegraph-identified-the-Hillsborough-Wikipedia-vandal.html | url-status=live }}

A Wikipediocracy blog post said in 2013 that Wikipedia was being vandalized from IP addresses assigned to the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF).{{cite web|url=http://wikipediocracy.com/2013/04/22/busy-day-at-the-wikimedia-foundation-office/|title=Busy day at the Wikimedia Foundation office?|last=Hogsky|first=Roger|access-date=24 May 2013|publisher=Wikipediocracy|work=Blog|date=22 April 2013|archive-date=23 December 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191223181954/https://wikipediocracy.com/2013/04/22/busy-day-at-the-wikimedia-foundation-office/|url-status=live}} Responding to the allegations, WMF spokesman Jay Walsh stated that the IP addresses belonged to WMF servers and were not used by the WMF offices. He stated that the addresses were assigned to some edits by IPs due to a misconfiguration, which was corrected.{{cite web|url=http://www.dailydot.com/society/wikipedia-staffers-vandalizing-wikipedia/|title=Wikipedia says its staffers are not vandalizing Wikipedia|last=Morris|first=Kevin|publisher=The Daily Dot|date=23 April 2013|access-date=24 May 2013|archive-date=1 January 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200101174136/https://www.dailydot.com/society/wikipedia-staffers-vandalizing-wikipedia/|url-status=live}}

A Wikipediocracy forum discussion identified the Wikipedia account responsible for a hoax article Wikipedia administrators had recently deleted. The "Bicholim conflict" article described a fictitious 1640–41 Indian civil war. It was awarded Wikipedia's "Good article" status in 2007, and retained it until late 2012, when a Wikipedian checked the article's cited sources and found that none of them appeared to exist.{{cite web|url=http://www.dailydot.com/news/wikipedia-bicholim-conflict-hoax-deleted/|title=After a half-decade, massive Wikipedia hoax finally exposed|publisher=The Daily Dot|first=Kevin|last=Morris|date=1 January 2013|access-date=18 May 2013|archive-date=10 April 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140410195455/http://www.dailydot.com/news/wikipedia-bicholim-conflict-hoax-deleted/|url-status=live}}

A September 2013 story resulting from a Wikipediocracy tip-off concerned commercial plastic surgeons editing Wikipedia's plastic surgery articles to promote their services. Concerns with violations of conflict of interest guidelines and the provision of misinformation in the relevant articles had also been raised by Wikipediocracy members on Wikipedia itself.{{cite web|url=http://www.dailydot.com/lifestyle/wikipedia-plastic-surgery-otto-placik-labiaplasty/|title=Are plastic surgeons nip/tucking ads into high-profile Wikipedia articles?|publisher=The Daily Dot|first=Audra|last=Schroeder|date=20 September 2013|access-date=7 October 2013|archive-date=1 June 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160601045629/http://www.dailydot.com/lifestyle/wikipedia-plastic-surgery-otto-placik-labiaplasty/|url-status=live}}

In February 2015, Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee banned a user after finding he had edited to promote the Indian Institute of Planning and Management and added negative material to the article on another university. The user's edits had been noted in Wikipediocracy in December 2013.{{cite web|url=http://scroll.in/article/714291/Wikipedia-bans-editor-for-consistent-bias-in-favour-of-Arindam-Chaudhuri%27s-IIPM|title=Wikipedia bans editor for consistent bias in favour of Arindam Chaudhuri's IIPM|website=www.scroll.in|first=Mridula|last=Chari|date=25 March 2015|access-date=5 April 2015|archive-date=30 April 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150430081559/http://scroll.in/article/714291/Wikipedia-bans-editor-for-consistent-bias-in-favour-of-Arindam-Chaudhuri%27s-IIPM|url-status=live}}

In late 2020, Wikipediocracy raised issues about the accuracy of the Wikipedia page of Nicholas Alahverdian.{{Cite web|last=Mooney|first=Tom|title=He was reported dead, but the state police kept looking for Nick Alahverdian|url=https://www.providencejournal.com/story/news/local/2021/01/27/nicholas-alahverdian-dcyf-critic-death-got-attention-state-police/4258174001/|access-date=27 January 2021|website=The Providence Journal|language=en-US|archive-date=27 January 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210127155751/https://www.providencejournal.com/story/news/local/2021/01/27/nicholas-alahverdian-dcyf-critic-death-got-attention-state-police/4258174001/|url-status=live}} A Wikipediocracy blog team member said that multiple Wikipedia accounts created by Alahverdian edited his Wikipedia page, and that one of these accounts had tried to remove Alahverdian's image, replacing it with an image of another person. A notice was added to Wikipedia that acknowledged that the "truthfulness of this article has been questioned". In January 2021, The Providence Journal reported that American authorities in July 2020 investigated whether Alahverdian had really died in February 2020 as reported in the media. Alahverdian was subsequently found alive in Scotland.{{Cite web|url=https://www.providencejournal.com/story/news/local/2022/01/12/ri-nick-alahverdian-suspected-faking-death-found-scotland/9188170002/|title=Nicholas Alahverdian, suspected of faking his death, was found in Scotland. What we know|first=Tom|last=Mooney|website=The Providence Journal|access-date=26 January 2022|archive-date=13 January 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220113041954/https://www.providencejournal.com/story/news/local/2022/01/12/ri-nick-alahverdian-suspected-faking-death-found-scotland/9188170002/|url-status=live}}

• List of Wikipedia controversies

{{reflist}}

{{commons category}}

• {{Official|http://wikipediocracy.com }}
• [http://wikipediocracy.com/2015/08/16/a-compendium-of-wikipedia-criticism/ A Compendium of Wikipedia Criticism]: summary post explaining the site's objections to Wikipedia practices
• [http://fullmeasure.news/news/cover-story/the-dark-side-of-wikipedia "The Dark Side of Wikipedia,"] Full Measure with Sharyl Attkisson, 17 April 2016. (Includes video.)

{{Wikipediahistory}}

Category:History of Wikipedia

Category:Internet properties established in 2012

Category:Internet forums

Category:Blogs

Category:Critics of Wikipedia