Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Template_standardisation
which, thanks to Violetriga getting the ball re-rolling, and current
unanimous-support, seeks to implement a standard style of article
template, coded in CSS, with an informative and clean aesthetic.
Posting here to increase awareness/support, per talkpage request.
Quiddity
http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1355852007&format=print
Among the biggest Wikipedia timewasters in the UK appear to be MoD
employees, who were responsible for more than 4,600 anonymous edits in the
past four years.
Wikipedia warzone MURDO MACLEOD
(mmcacleod(a)scotlandonsunday.com<mmcacleod(a)scotlandonsunday.com?subject=Wikipedia%20warzone>
)
THEY are the Wikipedia timewasters, anonymous cyber-vandals who use one of
the internet's greatest resources to abuse rivals, spread gossip and cause
widespread confusion.
But Scotland on Sunday can today reveal that many of the culprits are staff
at major companies, councils, government departments and other organisations
who spend their time sabotaging the free online encyclopaedia rather than
working.
>From the Prince of Wales's official residence to British Airways, the
Ministry of Defence and Aberdeenshire Council, this newspaper has
established precise numbers, times and details of how employees used work
computers to anonymously edit Wikipedia articles, often to spread abuse,
bigotry and outright nonsense.
Among the biggest Wikipedia timewasters in the UK appear to be MoD
employees, who were responsible for more than 4,600 anonymous edits in the
past four years.
They included 100 entries about Formula One, contributions about the 1970s
cartoon series Captain Caveman and several disparaging references to Scots
Pop Idol winner Michelle McManus.
MoD computers have been used to edit the entry on the Faslane Peace Camp,
claiming the submarine base was vital to the local economy and that if the
nuclear base left, the campaigners would find something else to complain
about.
Wikipedia was founded in 2001 and currently has two million English
articles, all of them written and edited by computer users around the world.
The site has always been vulnerable to abuse and last week it emerged the
CIA had edited articles including those relating to casualty levels in Iraq.
Many malicious editors of Wikipedia try to mask their identities, but using
sophisticated scanning software, Scotland on Sunday has traced thousands of
edits back to hundreds of organisations, several of which last night
launched investigations to track down those responsible.
Computers operated by Scotland's local authorities were used in 16,190
Wikipedia edits in the past four years.
Top of the league is Aberdeenshire with 2,004 changes. They were used to
make no fewer than 12 entries about Jaffa Cakes, along with a comment that
all "neds" are "gay".
In second place was South Lanarkshire Council, which recorded 1,505 Wiki
edits, including obscene and bigoted remarks about Celtic FC and Rangers
owner David Murray.
Perhaps one of the most surprising sources for anonymous Wiki editing is
Clarence House, the home of the Prince of Wales. An enthusiastic linguist at
the royal residence added a paragraph on the usage of the Australian
greeting "G'Day", while another remarked on the sexuality of a Surrey
businessman.
In addition, a computer on the network of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review
Commission was used to make comments about Rangers, calling them "the
world's most bigoted football club". And a Scottish Parliament computer was
used to change Tory MSP Phil Gallie's date of birth to 1839.
British Airways computers have been used to make anonymous edits about the
2005 Helios air crash north of Athens, which killed all 121 on board.
Meanwhile, a BBC computer was used to remove criticism of its iPlayer
software.
Computers at the Law Society of Scotland have been used to make anonymous
edits which removed a paragraph which was critical of them.
Wikipedia is also being used as a weapon in disputes within organisations.
Lesley Hinds, chairwoman of NHS Health Scotland, was criticised in an
anonymous, ungrammatical and misspelt Wikipedia posting which came from an
NHS Health Scotland computer.
It said: "Health Scotland is under the relocation review which will most
likely see it being moved from Edinburgh to Glasgow. Lesley Hinds appears to
support this which is surprising since she is meant to represent the
interests of Edinburgh in her Lord Provost role. When this policy was
released it was expected she would of resigned is [sic] protest but instead
has continued working in both jobs."
Mike Emmott, employee relations adviser with the Chartered Institute of
Personnel and Development, said: "Most employers would expect anyone wanting
to edit Wikipedia to do it at home and in their own time. Employers are not
Attila the Huns who will ban everything and they accept a little bit of give
and take, but it is hard to see how vandalising Wikipedia pages is
acceptable. A ringleader for this kind of activity could even find
themselves being dismissed."
Andre Coner, a consultant with computer security firm Commissum, said: "It's
a myth that everyone is anonymous online. They're not. In order for you to
send and receive information, the various servers need to know where your
computer is."
Spokeswomen for both the MoD and the Scottish Parliament said they were
aware of the issue and were looking into the origin of the offending edits.
A BA spokesman said it was also looking into the issue.
And South Lanarkshire Council pledged "appropriate action".
However, a spokeswoman for Aberdeenshire Council suggested that most of the
edits would have come from youngsters using school computers and members of
the public using library machines.
A spokeswoman for the Law Society of Scotland said it had removed inaccurate
and outdated criticism and that since the number beside the edit could be
identified as belonging to the Law Society it could not be construed as
anonymous.
Cut and run
January 31, 2006, 6.58pm
A user going by the name of Sjharte, who identifies himself as being an
Edinburgh-based lawyer, added the following paragraph to the Wikipedia page
on the Law Society of Scotland.
"There has been criticism of the Law Society of Scotland from some sections
of the Scottish public citing the level of complaints by members of the
public against Scottish solicitors. The Scottish Executive has instituted
studies into regulation of the Scottish legal profession."
February 8, 7.11pm
An anonymous writer deletes the paragraph. The edit can be traced to a
computer on the Law Society of Scotland network.
7.46pm
Another Wikipedia editor, under the name of ALoan, restores the critical
paragraph.
February 17, 1.22pm
Again an anonymous writer deletes the paragraph of criticism. Again from a
computer on the Law Society of Scotland network.
February 19, 10.17pm
"Sjharte" edits the page to bring back the paragraph.
February 23, 5.27pm
Again an edit is made from a Law Society computer.
8.27pm
"Sjharte" puts the critical paragraph back in.
March 24, 3.18pm
Anonymous but traceable. The Law Society computer is used to wipe out the
paragraph again.
9.29pm
Sjharte has another go, adding the critical paragraph and branding the
anonymous edits as "vandalism".
April 13 ,2006, 10.56am
Resistance is useless. Again the criticism is blanked out. Again the edit is
anonymous. Again it can be traced to a Law Society of Scotland computer.
WHAT IS WIKISCANNER?
Wikiscanner allows users to hunt for anonymous edits which came from
computers at the networks of various organisations.
This is the basic Wikiscanner link, enjoy: wikiscanner.virgil.gr
This is the link which takes the user to all the anonymous edits originating
with computers on Ministry of Defence networks:
wikiscanner.virgil.gr/f.php?ip2=82.110.109.192-255&nolimit=1
This is the link which takes the user to all the anonymous edits originating
with computers on British Airways networks:
wikiscanner.virgil.gr/f.php?ip1=163.166.150.0-255&ip2=163.166.137.0-255&ip3=163.166.0.0-136.255
This is for the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission:
wikiscanner.virgil.gr/f.php?ip1=82.70.48.72-79
*This article:* http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1355852007
*Last updated:* 25-Aug-07 00:56 BST
William Pietri wrote
> The New York Times has a public editor, an ombudsman-like role,
> currently filled by Clark Hoyt. He has just written an article where he
> examines the same problem we face with BLPs of marginal figures:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/26/opinion/26pubed.html
>
> It's exciting to see sources coming to grips with the problems we've
> been dealing with for a while. Interesting that they only get one
> complaint a day; I gather our numbers are higher.
Yes, very interesting. Journalists are so charming. "We can't change the article because it is part of the historical record." Such confusion. Journalism is only ever 'the first draft of history'. Newpapers are notoriously bad at publishing adequate apologies and corrections: no real prominence given. And now it turns out that not only are they not interested in doing a second draft, they regard the first draft as part of the 'historical record', not to be tampered with.
They could of course footnote those old, erroneous articles to show exactly how wrong they got it. This would be good for scholars. Rather worse for the newspaper's reputation, of course.
I'm rather cheered about WP's model. I was asked last night whether WP posts apologies. No, we don't, but rather than a formulaic expression of regret, we can move fast to fix things up and have fewer pretensions about always being right.
Charles
-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam
Nobody is currently in the process of standing for adminship on
en.wikipedia ... the last three ran their time and were closed earlier
today.
I don't recall seeing the page empty the entire time I've been here...
--
-george william herbert
george.herbert(a)gmail.com
On 26 Aug 2007 at 12:55:36 -0600, Todd Allen <toddmallen(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> So, there's my criticism for the day. I think, to far too large of an
> extent, things are trying to be done in ways that -once- worked, for a
> much smaller and more obscure project, but no longer work since that
> project doesn't exist anymore, and it's been replaced by a
> highly-publicized behemoth. Village council governance works great for a
> village where everybody knows everybody, but it ceases to when that
> village suddenly grows to the size of New York City. That doesn't mean
> everyone who loved that openness and informality will give it up easily,
> nor even that they should not insist that the best parts of that should
> not be retained, but changes do have to get made.
Although, I wouldn't classify the BADSITES policy as being "open" or
"informal" in any way... nor does it fit very well into the general
philosophical framework of the early, geeky, community; geeks tend to
have "Information Wants To Be Free"-style positions in opposition to
wanting tight control over the flow of information.
There wasn't likely to be any pressure for an anti-attack-site policy
in the earliest days, anyway, since when it was a small geeky project
it probably didn't have very many attackers out there yet.
That sort of policy is more of an artifact of the middle stage...
when it's grown way beyond the tiny size of its early days, but some
are desperately trying to keep (awkwardly and artificially) the
cohesiveness and collegiality of those days, by forcibly shutting out
parts of the outside world they find to disrupt it.
You're hopefully right that they'll outgrow that eventually, but what
sort of structure will develop next?
--
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/
I think this was meant to go to wikien-l, I've sent it there too.
On 8/26/07, K P <kpbotany(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Someone recently posted an article about how to use Wikipedia to move
> up on Google search engine results. I had also read another article
> on the same topic on a private list serve.
>
> I have now caught what appears to be a publisher using methods similar
> to what we've been reading about, being careful not to use their own
> in-house computers, creating multiple accounts and IPs to do the work,
> adding multiple outside links to legite and related texts and journals
> to one article, then making that article a prime see also for related
> articles.
>
> Very clever, very well done, if only they had had the patience to do
> it a little slower, and use someone a little nicer. See my post on
> AN/I and follow my links for a little insider's view on how to promote
> a product on Wikipedia.
>
> KP
>
> PS In spite of direct and quick access to ISPNs and journal links,
> this still could be someone who doesn't work for Elsevier, but really
> likes their journals and books enough that they would do this.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incide…
>
> _______________________________________________
> Commons-l mailing list
> Commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>
--
Stephen Bain
stephen.bain(a)gmail.com
> > I used to be in the Navy.
>
> Cue the Village People song.... No, not Y.M.C.A., the other one.
Yes you can sail the seven seas,
In the navy,
You can live a life of ease...
Johnleemk
Y'know, congress decided that the Navy ought to be 80% male and 100%
heterosexual. And...um...the Navy transports the Marines everywhere.
Female sailors have it made. ;)
-Durova
On 26 Aug 2007 at 09:24:40 -0700, Durova <nadezhda.durova(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> I used to be in the Navy.
Cue the Village People song.... No, not Y.M.C.A., the other one.
--
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/
On 26 Aug 2007 at 09:54:09 -0700, William Pietri
<william(a)scissor.com> wrote:
> I think this is mainly a historical artifact. It's only very recently
> that articles were even conceivably changeable, and newspapers see
> themselves as mainly about the new. What has changed here is that access
> to archives is now orders of magnitude easier. What took hours or days
> before now takes seconds.
Though, George Orwell anticipated rewritable history when he had the
Party in 1984 go through old newspaper archives and actually reprint
the old issues with articles conforming to today's party line.
--
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/
On 26 Aug 2007 at 12:55:36 -0600, Todd Allen <toddmallen(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> I'd be fine with that. Then again, I'm on Hivemind already, and
> obviously I've never made any secret of my real name, as you'd see on
> this email which will go to the public mailing list.
I'll see you and raise you one... I've been on both Hivemind and on
one version of Jeff Merkey's Merkeylaw site, though neither has
anything on me now that I know of.
I laugh when anybody claims I have no business putting down
"BADSITES" link restrictions because I don't know what it's like to
be attacked by one of those sites... I was, and my reaction was to
link to the "bad site" that was attacking me in order to hold them up
to ridicule.
--
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/