Follow me on
Twitter

More Information

NEW Expanded Edition

PRESS RELEASES FROM HELL and How to Fix Them
The Traditional Press Release Is Dead! The Made-for-the-Internet Release is News Now.
Buy this Report.

REALITY PR STRATEGY: Everything You Need to Know to Get Free (or Really Cheap) Publicity Now. Before you spend another dime on PR, Buy this Report.

Wikipedia to Bar Anonymous Entries Amidst Curry-Gate

As the rest of the world can see by looking at the outcome of the 2004 U.S. Presidential elections, the lowest common denominator often rules in a democracy. That's what many observers, including me, believe has happened to Wikipedia, the popular anyone-can-contribute and edit encyclopedia.

So I welcome the news that in response to a recent brou ha ha, Wikipedia's Jimmy Wales is changing the rules of to bar anonymous entries. Only registered members will be able to write and change entries, beginning today.

Dave Winer has an explanation of why Wikipedia can be dangerous. "Every fact in there must be considered partisan, written by someone with a confict of interest."

The debate centers around Adam Curry's recent editing of the history of podcasting entry in Wikipedia, which has raised a hue and cry among bloggers.

"That I'm trying to inflate my role in the history of podcasting is a mean-spirited claim," he said, "and not based on the facts of my (Wikipedia) edits and entries. But the meme took, and now I'm the asshole of the week."

And then he punts. "Maybe we should get five or six key figures on a Skype call and podcast a conversation about the 'definitive history of podcasting'," Curry writes on his blog. "We could make a mini-series out of it :)"

Categories: News

BL Ochman | Dec 5 05 11:55 | TrackBack (0)

Comments

Actually, BL, Curry isn't the motivation for the change. It was an entry on John Seigenthaler, an assistant to Robert Kennedy and one of his pallbearers, and more recently a constitutional scholar and an editorial page editor at USA Today. Jimmy Wales' new rule is that you must register to create new entries, not to edit existing ones. Registering doesn't make you identifiable. And now Wales is talking about prohibiting an individual from editing entries about him or herself, which IS a reaction to Currygate. (No, I didn't really call it Currygate, did I?) This one worries me. How long until a company is prohibited from correcting mistakes in their entries, leaving misinformation from activists on the page?

Posted by: Shel Holtz at December 7, 2005 11:47 AM

I agree Shel. This is a very serious issue. I think the idea of rating the credibility of authors is one that has stood the test of time on other sites and might be applies to wikipedia too.

Posted by: BL Ochman at December 7, 2005 11:51 AM

Email this story to a friend

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.whatsnextonline.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2794

Search

Contact: BL (at) whatsnextonline (dot) com
212.369.8312

RSS Feed

blog advertising

About BL Ochman

Blogger, social media strategy consultant to Fortune 500 companies, and sought-after corporate speaker B.L. Ochman heads the creative team of whatsnextonline.com. She also publishes the Ethics Crisis blog for SRF Global Translations

Poll ID 0 does not exist.