Did you know that actor Martin Sheen once served on the Malibu City Council? Actually, he didn’t. But until a few months ago, a statement saying he did appeared on Wikipedia, a Web site that calls itself “the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.”
Founded in 2001, Wikipedia contains more than four million entries on almost every topic one can think of, including cartoon characters, wars, scientific terms and even types of candy. Anybody can write an entry on Wikipedia and, in turn, anybody can edit that entry. The site encourages people to cite sources for the entries, but this is often not done.
The idea behind Wikipedia is that with more people reviewing and editing an entry, it is more likely to be accurate. But in reality, it leads to sabotage (especially with political figures’ entries) and misinformation. This would not be a problem if Wikipedia were a site only viewed by Internet geeks and those with way too much time on their hands. But Wikipedia is one of the most popular sites on the Web and to many it is a perceived source of reliable information.
This month, Wikipedia was in the news following the death of disgraced former Enron executive Ken Lay. Shortly after the announcement of his death, it was stated in the Ken Lay entry on Wikipedia that he had died of an apparent suicide. A few minutes later, the entry was changed to say he died of a heart attack (which is what he actually died of). Then it was changed to say he died of a “heart attack or suicide.” And not long after that the entry stated, “The guilt of ruining so many lives finally (sic) led him to his suicide.”
This is not a unique example of the unreliability of Wikipedia. The one that received the most notoriety occurred last year when it was discovered that an entry on legendary newsman John Seigenthaler said he had been a suspect in the assassinations of John F. Kennedy and Robert Kennedy. The statement, which had no basis in fact, remained on the site for several months until it was brought to Seigenthaler’s attention. Since that time, Wikipedia has instituted a policy that people must register their full names before editing or creating an entry. Of course, anybody who knows anything about the Internet knows that it is not too tough to get around having to use your real name, even when you are supposedly required to do so.
I became fascinated with Wikipedia earlier this year when I discovered nearly every time I did a Google search on a famous name, issue or organization, the first thing that came up was the entry for that item on Wikipedia. One day, I decided to see how the city of Malibu appeared on Wikipedia. For the most part, I was impressed with the entry. It included information that was accurate about the city’s history and some of the various areas, such as Serra Retreat and Malibu Colony.
Then I came to the statement that said Sheen was once on the City Council. Upon reading that, I decided to become a Wikipedia editor and I deleted that information. Feeling proud that I had helped humanity’s ability to receive correct information on the city in which I work, I went to sleep.
The next day, I saw that the Sheen information had been put back in the Malibu entry. Disappointed that my contribution to Wikipedia had been reversed, I again deleted the information. This deletion and reappearance war went on for a few days until finally I noticed that each entry on Wikipedia includes a discussion section one can go where potential changes to the entry are debated.
Among the items being debated about Malibu were whether it should say that Pepperdine is “adjacent to Malibu” rather than “in Malibu” since Pepperdine is not part of the city. Another issue was whether to mention the city’s purchase (or more accurately, proposal to purchase) Bluffs Park. Now, on a side note (and as a way to make Wikipedia feel better), a Web site that shall go unnamed and claims to be “Malibu’s only daily news” recently had an article stating (using Councilmember Sharon Barovsky as its only source) that the Bluffs Park purchase by the city of Malibu had been completed, when in fact it had not. So Wikipedia is not the only Web site suffering from inaccuracy.
I decided to add my own argument to the discussion page. I wrote, “I work for a newspaper in Malibu. I know for a fact Martin Sheen never served on the City Council. Please remove that line.”
Within a few hours, a Wikipedia “administrator” responded to my comment and thanked me for the information. This “administrator,” who, according to his Wikipedia profile, has won Wikipedia awards for his work on the site, officially deleted the Sheen information.
Now, I hope he wasn’t doing it just because I said I work for a newspaper in Malibu. How did he know I was telling the truth? Hopefully he did something that is becoming more rare in these days where we have Wikipedia and blogs disguising themselves as Internet news sources-he did some fact checking.