A Bitter Turf War is Raging on the Brexit Wikipedia Page
Published on April 30, 2019 at 07:00AM
Wikipedia editors are battling to tell the story of Brexit as it happens. And on such a hotly-debated page, every edit is controversial and suspicions run wild. From a report: Editors are parrying death threats, doxxing attempts and accusations of bias, as the crowdsourced epic has become the centre of a relentless tug-of-war over who gets to write the history of the UK as it happens. Originally posted in January 2014, what began life as "Proposed referendum on United Kingdom membership of the European Union" has bloated into a 11,757-word behemoth. But the article's vast size is the least of its problems. In private, and on discussion pages, editors tell tales of turf wars, sock puppet accounts, and anonymous figures hellbent on stuffing the article with information that supports their point of view. "I was heavily involved with the Brexit page, but gave up more than a year ago because the level of bias on it proved impossible to address and the aggravation of trying to deal with that was not worthwhile," says EddieHugh, a Wikipedia editor who has made 186 edits on the Brexit page -- making them one of its most prolific contributors. Since leaving the page behind, EddieHugh now specialises in editing entries about obscure mid-century jazz musicians. For the dedicated cabal of Wikipedians who are still editing the page, the battle against bias is never-ending. [...] One sentence Snoogans added to the page's opening paragraphs is particularly divisive. Early on the article refers to a "broad consensus" among economists that Brexit will damage the UK economy. Soon after he added the sentence, other editors tried to remove the edit, arguing that economists aren't reliable enough to be included in Wikipedia articles. Wikipedia's rules don't contain specific guidelines about economists, but recommend that "academic and peer-reviewed publications, scholarly monographs and textbooks" should be used as sources where possible.
Published on April 30, 2019 at 07:00AM
Wikipedia editors are battling to tell the story of Brexit as it happens. And on such a hotly-debated page, every edit is controversial and suspicions run wild. From a report: Editors are parrying death threats, doxxing attempts and accusations of bias, as the crowdsourced epic has become the centre of a relentless tug-of-war over who gets to write the history of the UK as it happens. Originally posted in January 2014, what began life as "Proposed referendum on United Kingdom membership of the European Union" has bloated into a 11,757-word behemoth. But the article's vast size is the least of its problems. In private, and on discussion pages, editors tell tales of turf wars, sock puppet accounts, and anonymous figures hellbent on stuffing the article with information that supports their point of view. "I was heavily involved with the Brexit page, but gave up more than a year ago because the level of bias on it proved impossible to address and the aggravation of trying to deal with that was not worthwhile," says EddieHugh, a Wikipedia editor who has made 186 edits on the Brexit page -- making them one of its most prolific contributors. Since leaving the page behind, EddieHugh now specialises in editing entries about obscure mid-century jazz musicians. For the dedicated cabal of Wikipedians who are still editing the page, the battle against bias is never-ending. [...] One sentence Snoogans added to the page's opening paragraphs is particularly divisive. Early on the article refers to a "broad consensus" among economists that Brexit will damage the UK economy. Soon after he added the sentence, other editors tried to remove the edit, arguing that economists aren't reliable enough to be included in Wikipedia articles. Wikipedia's rules don't contain specific guidelines about economists, but recommend that "academic and peer-reviewed publications, scholarly monographs and textbooks" should be used as sources where possible.
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Comments
Post a Comment