In May 2014 \textit{The New Yorker} published a story called ``How a Raccoon Became an Aardvark'' in its column ``Annals of Technology''~\cite{Randall2014}.
It tells an anecdote about a New York student who, some 6 years before, edited the Wikipedia article on ``coati'' (a member of the racoon family) to state that the coati is ``also known as a Brazilian aardvark''.
Now, this is exactly how Wikipedia works, right?
Anyone can edit and small contribution by small contribution the world's largest knowledge base is compiled.
Except, the kid made the thing up and published on Wikipedia an inside joke he had with his brother on their holiday trip to Brazil.
Unsourced pieces of information are not supposed to survive long on Wikipedia and he thought that the edit will be swiftly deleted.
Fast-forward to 2010, not only had the entry on ``coati'' not changed, but it cited a 2010 article by the \textit{Telegraph} as an evidence.
In the meantime several newspapers and a book published by the University of Chicago~\cite{} claimed that the coati was known as a Brazilan aardvark.
It proved not trivial to erase the piece from Wikipedia since there all these other sources affirming the statement.
By then, it was not exactly false either: the coati \emph{was} known as ``Brazilian aardvark'', at least on the Internet.
Now, despite the fact that at any given moment/on the whole Wikipedia may contain more or less the same amount of errors as the encyclopedia Britanica, %TODO quote!
the stories of hoaxes like the one above are precisely why it is still maintained that information on Wikipedia cannot be trusted and it cannot be used as a serious bibliographic reference.
Quality control.
%TODO check Aaron Swartz' blog for opening quotes
%TODO check Aaron Swartz' blog for opening quotes
\begin{comment}
\begin{comment}
Another candidate for an opening quote:
Another candidate for an opening quote:
...
@@ -39,9 +55,17 @@ In 2009, yet another mechanism was introduced(syn)/announced/implemented.
...
@@ -39,9 +55,17 @@ In 2009, yet another mechanism was introduced(syn)/announced/implemented.
Its core developer, Andrew Garrett, known on Wikipedia as User:Werdna, has called it ``abuse filter'', and according to EN Wikipedia's newspaper, The Signpost, its purpose was to ``allow[] all edits to be checked against automatic filters and heuristics, which can be set up to look for patterns of vandalism including page move vandalism and juvenile-type vandalism, as well as common newbie mistakes''.
Its core developer, Andrew Garrett, known on Wikipedia as User:Werdna, has called it ``abuse filter'', and according to EN Wikipedia's newspaper, The Signpost, its purpose was to ``allow[] all edits to be checked against automatic filters and heuristics, which can be set up to look for patterns of vandalism including page move vandalism and juvenile-type vandalism, as well as common newbie mistakes''.
%TODO decide whether to cite the Signpost here already, since it appears again in chapter4
%TODO decide whether to cite the Signpost here already, since it appears again in chapter4
%TODO decide what to do with this paragraph; most of it should be mentioned already
\begin{comment}
As I recently learned, apparently this guideline arose/took such a central position not from the very beginning of the existence of the collaborative encyclopedia.
It rather arose at a time when, after a significant growth in Wikipedia, it wasn't manageable to govern the project (and most importantly fight emergent vandalism which grew proportionally to the project's growth) manually anymore.
To counteract vandalism, a number of automated measures was applied.
These, however, had also unforseen negative consequences: they drove newcomers away~\cite{HalKitRied2011}(quote literature) (since their edits were often classified as "vandalism", because they were not familiar with guidelines / wiki syntax / etc.)
In an attempt to fix this issue, "Assume good faith" rose to a prominent position among Wikipedia's Guidelines.
(Specifically, the page was created on March 3rd, 2004 and was originally refering to good faith during edit wars.
An expansion of the page from December 29th 2004 starts refering to vandalism. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith&oldid=8915036)
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
\begin{comment}
Don't make it a separate subsection, but use it to introduce the topic with a story, the way Geiger does.
If the genesis doesn't make sense here, move it to Edit filters
Nice quote:
Nice quote:
The Wikipedia Revolution: How A Bunch of Nobodies Created The World's Greatest Encyclopedia is a 2009 popular history book by new media researcher and writer Andrew Lih.
The Wikipedia Revolution: How A Bunch of Nobodies Created The World's Greatest Encyclopedia is a 2009 popular history book by new media researcher and writer Andrew Lih.
...
@@ -70,16 +94,6 @@ That has the power to keep stuff out.
...
@@ -70,16 +94,6 @@ That has the power to keep stuff out.
Which stuff?
Which stuff?
\end{comment}
\end{comment}
%TODO decide what to do with this paragraph; most of it should be mentioned already
\begin{comment}
As I recently learned, apparently this guideline arose/took such a central position not from the very beginning of the existence of the collaborative encyclopedia.
It rather arose at a time when, after a significant growth in Wikipedia, it wasn't manageable to govern the project (and most importantly fight emergent vandalism which grew proportionally to the project's growth) manually anymore.
To counteract vandalism, a number of automated measures was applied.
These, however, had also unforseen negative consequences: they drove newcomers away~\cite{HalKitRied2011}(quote literature) (since their edits were often classified as "vandalism", because they were not familiar with guidelines / wiki syntax / etc.)
In an attempt to fix this issue, "Assume good faith" rose to a prominent position among Wikipedia's Guidelines.
(Specifically, the page was created on March 3rd, 2004 and was originally refering to good faith during edit wars.
An expansion of the page from December 29th 2004 starts refering to vandalism. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith&oldid=8915036)
