Snappy newsletters. Simple Facebook sharing. Spirited comments. Sweet features are waiting… GET THEM NOW!

Contributors Flee Wikipedia's Stricter Rules

Effort to combat bias, vandalism has thinned ranks by 49K

By Harry Kimball,  Newser Staff

Posted Nov 23, 2009 10:18 AM CST
Email

(Newser) – In an attempt to rein in the lawlessness and veiled opinion running rampant among its volunteer editors, Wikipedia may have shot itself in the foot. In the first 3 months of this year, there's been something of a stampede of contributors exiting the crowdsourced online encyclopedia, leading to a net loss of 49,000, analysis shows, compared to just 4,900 in the same period a year earlier. And some blame new restrictions meant to curb vandalism in a community where one of the rules used to be “Ignore all rules.”

“Wikipedia is becoming a more hostile environment,” the researcher who noticed the trend tells the Wall Street Journal. “Many people are getting burnt out.” The new rules require a more thorough vetting of certain articles after a recent uptick in blatant lies and biased articles, and at least one expert thinks the falloff may be a good thing. “It's too many cooks in the kitchen,” he says. Perhaps so—though participation has fallen off, the number of visitors is booming.

The Wikipedia home page.
The Wikipedia home page.   (Wikipedia)
« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow

We need sufficient people to do the work that needs to be done. But the purpose of the project is not participation. - Sue Gardner, executive director, Wikimedia Foundation

« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow
To report an error on this story, notify our editors.
A snapshot of the day's best news stories.
 
COMMENTS
Showing 3 of 5 comments
yummines
Nov 24, 2009 1:09 AM CST
i dunno. though it may cause people to contribute less, those that make articles based off of biased articles, vandalize, or make articles based off of lies are not exactly contributing... anything to make the articles more truthful and professional, it is an online encyclopedia after all...
cochiserocks
Nov 23, 2009 11:10 AM CST
I don't think it will ever go under. It's just too damned brilliant to have all that information at your finger tips. They did a whole series of random fact tests against a bunch of encyclopaedias - and Wiki came out on top - even with some of the clueless entries that had been accepted. Like JoeQ says - they're just growing up. No bad thing.
DontLikeYou___
Nov 23, 2009 7:03 AM CST
{{{{ The new rules require a more thorough vetting of certain articles after a recent uptick in blatant lies and biased articles }}} ---- Why, that's just terrible. Whoever heard of such a policy of vetting those who would be in charge of information we read?

 
Internet • Wikipedia • Web 2.0 • editor • online encyclopedia • restrictions • rules • crowdsourcing • contributor • participation

More Newser Stories

Wikipedia Adds Editor Review for Some Articles

Google Unveils Wikipedia Rival

New Site Wants Your Wikipedia Rejected Bio
NEWS FROM OUR PARTNERS
Other Sites We Like:   24/7 Wall St.   |   Betty Confidential   |   BuzzFeed   |   Cracked   |   Fark   |   Timelines   |   The Frisky   |   Geek Sugar   |   NewsOne