Wikipedia: an information resource more reliable and resilient than it seems

Enlarge picture

A Wikipedia user looking for information. ANXO IGLESIAS

Wikipedia has become, over the years, an increasingly complete, relevant and didactic tool. With about 45 million articles in more than 280 languages ​​(of which Spanish occupies the third place with 1.3 million) it seems difficult to manage such a volume of information. Especially when it has spread to sister projects of the Wikimedia Foundation that also include photographs and images ( Wikimedia Commons ), books, reliable databases ( Wikidata ) and other areas of human knowledge.

As solid foundations as the Internet itself

But the key is as old as the Internet itself: self-organized chaos. Hundreds of volunteers with more or less knowledge - called librarians and wikipedistas - manage the most complex situations of the editing of the material, helping the rest and even organizing votes for the most relevant subjects. But as anyone can register and change the text that show the most popular pages sometimes strange things happen.

MORE INFORMATION

• Wikispánica

• 

  The war of the 'bots' is waged on Wikipedia
• Wikipedia reinvents itself for Android devices

One of the last anecdotes happened during the past festival of Eurovision: in the page of Manel Navarro someone added the nickname "The Rooster" after finishing his performance. Captures circulated through social networks and Whatsapp, although the record shows that the change was barely a few on the Wikipedia page until a patrol botreversed it. Then the page was protected to avoid further vandalism. The same thing happened with the motto of France that was stripped of the Liberté, égalité, fraternitéin exchange for a more modern "I will pgepagag a sena of pigcoteo". Gamberradas without more relevance. If no one had echoed and magnified the "news" or noticed the change, it also lasted no longer than a while on the original page.

Some people use these anecdotes or arguments of the type "anyone can edit" or "to know where that information came from" to criticize Wikipedia with contempt. But they ignore that this is precisely their great strength: just as anyone can edit it also anyone can reverse the acts of vandalism, correct the wrong information or improve the one that is incomplete by providing reliable sources. And experts on all issues there is more than enough and - as his own existence shows - willing enough to do so.

A Wikipedia for the New Times

In those times when it is difficult to distinguish information from disinformation, interested content from neutral information or honest information advertising , Wikipedia's principles are more relevant than ever: its aim is to be an encyclopedia; offer a neutral point of view; with free content that anyone can reuse; where community etiquette standards are respected and common sense is used when editing pages.

Many of the problems arise because popular characters or companies believe that they should be able to count on their own pages. But Wikipedia is not an information repository nor a white pages or a catalog of products. They also believe they have the right to edit or correct the information that concerns them , but among the rules is to avoid conflicts of interest (so no one should edit your own page or your company, your products or your friends). Others think that they can include data without more, but Wikipedia is not a primary source and the information should be linked to reliable sources , usually books or scientific papers already published, news in prestigious newspapers or links to websites with a reputation.

A design to ensure resilience

The key to that resilience is that Wikipedia has a great capacity for self-correction . It was designed for it. And not only publishers and readers can correct it; thousands of editors watch it, hundreds of experts are aware of the changes that are made on certain issues and even legions of bots ensure that there is no vandalism or corrections that make no sense. In the worst case - when a current topic popularises or brings the controversy to certain articles, librarians can even temporarily block the page to wait for the information to be verified twice before being published.

Some discussions and arguments of the radio or television gatherings would not support a revision of the first page of Wikipedia on the subject they deal with. Aware of its relevance, more and more people are armed with such data for their discussions - and it is not uncommon to hear that "sure is taken from Wikipedia, who knows who wrote that." Serious error: if it is there it is probably more documented and proven than you can believe.

The influence of Wikipedia also makes it the target of greater vandalism, which must be controlled

Jorge Sierra, vice president of Wikimedia Spain, believes that the growing community of wikipedistas increasingly involved has been key in recent years. But there are also other factors: "The influence of Wikipedia also makes it the target of more vandalism, which has to be controlled. There are classic tools, such as follow-up lists or recent changes, which are among the most used." Thanks to them, those interested in a subject - be it mussel farming , the Battle of Trafalgar or biopolymers- receive instant notices of any changes made to the pages of their interest. Anyone who has created a page will undoubtedly be interested in it (and there will probably be many more). If it does not interest anybody, surely it will not be very important. The fact is that every modification that is done ends up reaching the most suitable people to check it, give it for good or reverse it.

Another key, according to Sierra, is Wikidata: "It is a sister project of Wikipedia that guides it towards a semantic web and that makes the database of objective elements (dates, places, titles ...) is central, updatable and accessible by bots and automated correction tools. " This is especially useful for facts, observations and incontrovertible events, rather than for points of view or interpretations.

The human factor and the picaresque

The popularity of Wikipedia has made all types of companies and entities want to appear in it "regardless," says Sierra. In the United States there were several cases of smuggling attempts , which resulted in the eviction of the cheaters. In Spain there has also been a similar situation: "Several wikipedistas receive offers to create articles from companies or improve others (usually eliminate criticism and add laudatory information.) The best vaccine remain the policies of Wikipedia: neutral point of view, information truthful and referenced. "

The best recommendation when a company or person wants to edit something but should not do it because of a conflict of interest is to register and then use the page called Discussion that accompanies each article. There you can kindly ask to modify a data or include a link; doing so is licit and helps those who edit the articles. If someone attempts to vandalize a data repeatedly anonymously a wikipedista will examine the objective data presented there and decide to stick with the most neutral, reliable and best referenced option .

Sierra has to explain to his students how to work with Wikipedia on a daily basis and explains it like this: "I tell you: if you find a fault, use the energy of criticism to correct it and in the process improve something that belongs to everyone. they write to tell me that there are still dinosaurs in the university that prevent them from using Wikipedia.I guess there will also be someone against mobile phones.I experience is that those who despise Wikipedia - many times as mouthpiece, which then always use it - changed of opinion when they know their functioning and the people who are behind. "

In the recent Jornadas de Wikimedia España by the free knowledge celebrated in Murcia. many Wikipedians have become distorted and seen faces. This and other similar meetings are a good opportunity to see how reliable is still the largest information resource and one of the most colossal projects on the Internet.