Feeds

Wikipedia sockpuppetry probe puts a sock in hundreds of accounts

Is 'edit-for-pay' deceitful or just garden variety PR sleaze?

Intelligent flash storage arrays

Wikipedia has blocked or banned over 250 user accounts as it investigates "suspicious edits and sockpuppetry" – the latter being the use of fictitious identities for the express purpose of bullshitting deceiving readers, usually for commercial or promotional purposes.

"It looks like a number of user accounts — perhaps as many as several hundred — may have been paid to write articles on Wikipedia promoting organizations or products," wrote outgoing Wikimedia Foundation executive director Sue Gardner in a blog post on Monday.

"Our readers know Wikipedia's not perfect," Gardner continued, "but they also know that it has their best interests at heart, and is never trying to sell them a product or propagandize them in any way. Our goal is to provide neutral, reliable information for our readers, and anything that threatens that is a serious problem."

And the investigation to which Gardner refers in her blog post has uncovered a serious problem, indeed. As described in painstaking detail earlier this month by The Daily Dot and last week by Vice, and as logged on a Wikipedia project page, the investigation has turned up hundreds of sockpuppets.

Perhaps the most troubling aspect of the rise in sockpuppetry is the parallel rise of Austin, Texas–based Wiki-PR, which promises its clients that they'll "have a dedicated Wikipedia project manager that understands your brand as well as you do. That means you need not worry about anyone tarnishing your image – be it personal, political, or corporate."

But what if your brand or image has factual, verifiable, objective aspects to it that an independent, not-for-hire editor finds germane to its Wikipedia entry? At the very minimum, Wiki-PR's promises to its clients are problematic. "Don't leave your Wikipedia page up to chance," they say. "Don't get caught in a PR debacle by editing your own page."

Wikipedia's Terms of Use are clear about sockpuppetry, expressly forbidding "Attempting to impersonate another user or individual, misrepresenting your affiliation with any individual or entity, or using the username of another user with the intent to deceive."

Offering for-pay services as does Wiki-PR, however, is not explicitly proscribed in the Terms of Use. However, as Gardner writes in her Monday blog post, "Editing-for-pay has been a divisive topic inside Wikipedia for many years, particularly when the edits to articles are promotional in nature."

For their part, Wiki-PR headman Jordan French says that his company is innocent. "The PR in Wiki-PR is a misnomer – we're a research and writing firm," he told the BBC.

"We're part of the fabric of Wikipedia – an integral part – and useful where volunteers don't want to or cannot put in the time to understand a subject, find sources, code, upload, and professionally monitor a page," French insists.

One can only assume that as the Wikimedia Foundation continues its investigations, the subject of editing for pay will take center stage along with its cousin – and possibly its enabler – sockpuppetry.

"The Wikimedia Foundation is closely monitoring this ongoing investigation and we are currently assessing all the options at our disposal," Garnder concludes. "We will have more to say in the coming weeks."

And we'll likely learn more about Wiki-PR's methods, as well. ®

Beginner's guide to SSL certificates

More from The Register

next story
I'll be back (and forward): Hollywood's time travel tribulations
Quick, call the Time Cops to sort out this paradox!
Megaupload overlord Kim Dotcom: The US HAS RADICALISED ME!
Now my lawyers have bailed 'cos I'm 'OFFICIALLY' BROKE
MI6 oversight report on Lee Rigby murder: US web giants offer 'safe haven for TERRORISM'
PM urged to 'prioritise issue' after Facebook hindsight find
BT said to have pulled patent-infringing boxes from DSL network
Take your license demand and stick it in your ASSIA
Right to be forgotten should apply to Google.com too: EU
And hey - no need to tell the website you've de-listed. That'll make it easier ...
Assange™ slumps back on Ecuador's sofa after detention appeal binned
Swedish court rules there's 'great risk' WikiLeaker will dodge prosecution
prev story

Whitepapers

Go beyond APM with real-time IT operations analytics
How IT operations teams can harness the wealth of wire data already flowing through their environment for real-time operational intelligence.
10 threats to successful enterprise endpoint backup
10 threats to a successful backup including issues with BYOD, slow backups and ineffective security.
Forging a new future with identity relationship management
Learn about ForgeRock's next generation IRM platform and how it is designed to empower CEOS's and enterprises to engage with consumers.
High Performance for All
While HPC is not new, it has traditionally been seen as a specialist area – is it now geared up to meet more mainstream requirements?
Website security in corporate America
Find out how you rank among other IT managers testing your website's vulnerabilities.