Wikipedia Watch

[Peter Presland]

This act of vandalism, of cyber book burning, strongly suggests that They're worried about Joel's meticulous investigative work.

I agree Jan. I'm no expert on the editing protocols on Wikepedia but it is clear to me from past controversies that there are people who actually make a living out of systematically massaging subjects. My understanding is that anyone can edit any entry and that all edits are logged together with user ID/IP address and subject to a sort of peer review process when disputes arise. There is also a class of (sort of) super-editors with special - allegedly earned - privileges/powers which include an element of adjudication of disputes and punishments for 'abuse' of the system - We just gotta have gatekeepers eh?

The thing is that, if someone IS being paid to massage a particular entry or subject, he/she can clearly devote serious focussed time to it such that the casual amateur with no axe to grind other than sourced accuracy is at a severe disadvantage.

I believe there are those who keep a disciplined eye out for such obvious massaging but the system is so vast that the imbalances described above will obviously have a serious effect over time.

I'm considering devoting a few weeks to digging into the mechanics of all this, with maybe a focussed attempt to get Joel's stuff reinstated. Thing is, when push comes to shove, I believe disputes are subject to a user community vote - and again, if the massagers are organised (and by definition the ones that concern me are likely to be WELL organised) then mustering sufficient votes when required may be a problem.