The WikiPolice

by Zach Hescox

So, I was messing around on the internet the other day and decided to visit Wikipedia, my favorite peer-edited online encyclopedia. I figured it was time to add my name to the vast ranks of contributors to the site. I thought of a good topic, gathered some old archived photos, and sat down to create my first Wikipedia entry.

I know this guy, who shall remain nameless, who has a long history of very interesting injuries. He has done everything from cracking his head open on a curb to severely burning his chest with an iron while trying to get the wrinkles out of a shirt he was wearing at the time. I felt that this particular individual deserved recognition. So I wrote up an entry, posted a photo of staples in his arm (which came from falling off a fence), and saved it to the Wikipedia database.

Needless to say, when I looked for the page a mere thirty seconds later, I was shocked to find that it had been deleted from the site. All that was left was a message stating that Administrative User AcademicChallenger had deleted the page under the content category of “junk.”

While I totally disagree with the ruling on that one, I respect the speed and efficiency of the Wikipedia administrators in deleting my post. In the Wikipedia world, they are known as sysops (short for System Operators). In my work, they are known as the WikiPolice, policing the content of the encyclopedia for the common good of all internet citizens.

But who are the WikiPolice? They are common Wikipedia users, like you and me, whose only superpower is the advantage of administrative access to the Wikipedia site. These folks are supposed to be very familiar with the Wikipedia policies on article deletion, editing, and the boundaries of the site.

Wikipedia has taken a lot of flack from the academic world over its life span. Those high and mighty people in their ivory towers tend to write of Wikipedia as an unfit, inaccurate source for word-of-mouth information. The WikiPolice are supposed to be a check on this information, and help make sure there is no “junk” on the site.

There is one little discrepancy, though. The WikiPolice are regular users, aren’t they? So how can anyone be sure that they have any idea what they are talking about? There is an application process to become a sysop, but I don’t think it includes educational background or field of study and editing contributions.

So, on Wikipedia, you cannot find out the background of a person who posts an article, and you can’t be sure who is policing it. So I guess there is some validity in the argument against Wikipedia as a valid academic resource. But I don’t care if the Wikipolice are Rhodes Scholars or ten-year-olds with nothing to do, I still love my Wikipedia.

(Editor's Note: There are a variety of opinions on the veracity of Wikipedia's material and not all of the authors of this blog have the same view of this peer-edited material. For more background on this controversy, please see this article from CNET.)

(The photo is from fffleisch at morgueFile.)


Wikipedia
Internet
Add to Technorati Favorites