Wikipedia’s hacking me off again

The problem with Wikipedia is it’s high visibility. It’s always had a lot of attention online as well as in the media, but in the past two years the hype kicked into overdrive, until the point that everybody in reach of CNN now knows two things about it: it’s an encyclopedia and everybody edit it. On the whole this is a good thing, as that means more people come over and help, but it also draws in the numbnuts unfortunately. And there are so many of them: conspiracy theorists, xenophonic nationalists of every possible variety, fratboys and other jokers, those who think Wikipedia is just one big game for their entertainment, just complete idiots, undsoweiter. It doesn’t make it easier.

Case in point: the article on James Nicoll, which over the course of this weekend has been under attack from a more persistent than usual nutter, some anonymous prick from an Earthlink segment. What they have been doing is abusing Wikipedia policy for a subtle campaign of sabotage, in the process turning what was not that good an article anyway into a complete and utter shitheap, keeping several editors, including yours truly, working all weekend to try and undo the damage, only for the little fucker to do more.

There are ways to get around this: semi-protecting the page by disallowing anonymous edits, banning the user in question (though since they use dynamic IP addresses this is hard to do without bothering others at his isp), etc, but you shouldn’t have to do this. Due to its open nature and high visibility Wikipedia is very vulnerable to trolling, and while damage is usually quickly repaired, it’s the battles with the trolls that wear people out. It was much more fun three years ago, when you could still edit pages without having to engage in pest control.