[Wikipedia-l] Problems with anonymous editing of Middle Eastern conflict-related articles

[Uri Yanover]

Dear Wikipedians,

I've wanted to write this letter for a long time, but has delayed it deeming
the upkeep of Wikipedia principles more important than my comfort. But the
principles become broken anyway, and my comfort is as well gone; therefore
I'll tell you what troubles me below.

It is not a secret that Wikipedia is at occasions the scene of massive
content wars between the supporters of various positions. This is natural
and expectable, the resolution coming at the end of each such war being an
improvement to the original article. However, there's one content war that
is unique, in several ways. It concerns the Arab-Israeli, and
Palestinian-Israeli conflicts.

During the recent months, Wikipedia has been the target of almost daily
twiddling, in sum amounting to vandalism, from different supporters of the
Arab position on the internet, most often editing the page anonymously. I do
not oppose them stating their views; however, their style of modifying bits
here and there, copy & pasting copyrighted articles, linking to pages of
explicitly propagandist nature, coupled with the fact that they do not have
a clue of what NPOV and Wikipedia in general is all about, creates a serious
problem.

On the other side of this equation, however, there's me. There aren't too
many people who are aware of the complex history of the region on Wikipedia;
out of them, there are fewer less who are ready to share they knowledge (by
risking to pace on the mine-field of political discussions). Although I do
not claim to be deeply knowledgeable, it is often only up to me to include
the Israeli perspective in these articles.

This is not to say that I don't get any help from you - I often do, and I'm
deeply grateful for it. But unfortunately, I am one man, yet what I face is
a whole horde of anonymous trolls. Just removing random changes and fixing
"omissions" takes all the time I can spare for Wikipedia; considering the
growing popularity of the site, I have to admit that my outlook on further
contribution grows grimmer; needless to say that this disappoints me, as I
have a deep sympathy to the Wikipedia effort, and politics (in forms
relevant to this discussion) are far from being on the list of my favorite
topics.

The basic premise of the Wiki concept is that in an open environment, an
article which can be edited by many participants, enjoys peer cooperation,
and as a result becomes better. I feel that this premise cannot work in this
case, as the troll cut-ins are random, and they certainly are not interested
in improving the article. The situation is too heated-up to allow normal
cooperation.

I should make it clear that in such an environment, my own ability to write
good-quality content (that is belonging to a NPOV, researched,
carefully-worded) is impaired. It is not just my personal comfort that
suffers; trolling does hurt Wikipedia by creating biased content, which
could, if uninterrupted, in the long run jeopardize Wikipedia's reputation
as a source representative and respective of different perspectives, and
showing understanding to various positions, not just one.

My request for you, then, is to block some of the most contested articles
(the list can be discussed elsewhere) from being edited by anonymous
("IP-only") users. Logged-in users will have access; whoever wishes to
include his points, will be able to do it in the traditional Wiki fashion -
by debate and cooperation. It seems to me as the optimal way of promoting
the peaceful conclusion of this content war - by disarmament, and minimal
impairing of Wiki rights.

If you have any other proposals - I'll be glad to know them. I do not know
which course we shall ultimately take, but I am confident that it is in our
power to bring about a proper, comprehensive solution for this situation.

With deepest respect,
            Uri Yanover