Wikipedia:Press coverage 2023

Since its inception in 2001, Wikipedia has been garnered substantial media attention. The following is a list of the project's press coverage received in 2023, sorted chronologically. Per WP:PRESS, this page excludes coverage exclusively on a single WP-article, coverage of (some aspect of) the project overall is wanted.

January

• "Wikipedia ha meno bisogno di soldi di quanto si pensi" [Wikipedia needs less money than what we think]. Il Post (in Italian). Italy. January 2, 2023. Retrieved January 22, 2023. Questa discrepanza tra il tono allarmista e un po' ricattatorio delle raccolte fondi e la situazione economica della Wikimedia Foundation mette da tempo a disagio alcuni dei volontari che lavorano gratuitamente alla stesura dell'enciclopedia creando nuove voci, modificando e ampliando quelle già esistenti, e controllando che le informazioni che contengono siano basate su fonti credibili. E ha portato, quest'anno, a una discussione accesissima e durata un mese – dal 25 ottobre al 24 novembre – che è finita con un cambiamento netto nel tono dell'ultima raccolta fondi, che ora trasmette un'idea più realistica del quadro finanziario di Wikipedia. [For a long time, this discrepancy between the alarmist and slightly "blackmail-ish" tone of the fundraising banners and the Wikimedia Foundation's economic status has made uncomfortable some of the volunteers that work on the development of the encyclopedia by creating new pages, editing and expanding the already existent ones, and verifying that the information included in them is based on reliable sources. And this year, (the same discrepancy) has led to an extremely heated discussion that lasted a month - from 25 October to 24 November - and ended up with clear changes in the tone of the latest fundraising campaign, which now conveys a more realistic idea of Wikipedia's economic framework.]

• Čiapaitė, Justina; Lyskoit, Violeta (January 3, 2023). "106 Funny Wikipedia Edits Internet Vandals Snuck Into Wiki Articles". Bored Panda. Retrieved January 4, 2023. However, as commonly said, once something is up on the internet, it's held in cyberspace forever. Thus, thanks to the invention of screenshots and Wikipedia's extensive collection of version history, the many funny Wikipedia edits are saved and documented, and trolling Wikipedia moments never go unnoticed or forgotten.

• "Saudi Arabia: Government Agents Infiltrate Wikipedia, Sentence Independent Wikipedia Administrators to Prison". Democracy for the Arab World Now. January 5, 2023. Retrieved January 6, 2023. It's despicable but entirely predictable that the Saudi government has prosecuted Saudis merely for posting content about the government's human rights abuses," said Raed Jarrar, DAWN's advocacy director. "But Wikimedia also needs to take responsibility for the fact that its authorized editors are today languishing in prison for work they did on Wikipedia pages.

• "Saudi Arabia jails two Wikipedia staff in 'bid to control content'". The Guardian. January 5, 2023. Retrieved January 6, 2023. An investigation by parent body Wikimedia found the Saudi government had penetrated Wikipedia's senior ranks in the region, with Saudi citizens acting or forced to act as agents, two rights groups said.

• "Saudi Arabia government 'infiltrates' Wikipedia and jails two staff to 'control narrative'". Euronews. January 6, 2023. Retrieved January 8, 2023. The NGOs said they had evidence of Wikipedia's penetration by the Saudi government based on interviews with sources close to the website and the imprisoned administrators.

• Gardner, Frank (January 7, 2023). "Wikipedia owner denies Saudi infiltration claim". BBC. Retrieved January 8, 2023. Citing "sources with knowledge of Wikimedia's operations", Smex and Dawn said at least one of the 16 were Saudi users, serving as agents for the government to "promote positive content about the government and delete content critical of the government". Wikimedia said this is "unlikely to be the case", adding that some users "who may have been Saudi" were among those banned.
• "The Cochrane-Wikipedia Partnership in 2023". Cochrane. January 10, 2023. Retrieved February 23, 2023. Cochrane partnered in 2014 with Wikipedia, with the joint goal of improving the quality and reliability of human health-related articles that people are accessing online.

• Harrison, Stephen (January 12, 2023). "Should ChatGPT Be Used to Write Wikipedia Articles?". Slate Magazine. Retrieved January 12, 2023. But now Wikipedians are engaged in a heated debate about whether ChatGPT should be allowed for drafting articles. Ready or not, Wikipedians must answer the question of whether to allow generative artificial intelligence to cross the great encyclopedic threshold.
• Ro, Crystal (January 10, 2023). "People Shared Some Very Interesting, Dark, And Cool Wikipedia "Facts" That I Think You're Gonna Enjoy". BuzzFeed. Retrieved January 17, 2023. In case you didn't know, there's an entire subreddit dedicated to Wikipedia.
• Colussi, Mary (January 13, 2023). "11 Fascinating Royal Wikipedia Pages To Peruse Once You've Finished Reading (Or Reading About) Prince Harry's Memoir". BuzzFeed. Retrieved January 17, 2023. As a weird information enthusiast and a Wikipedia aficionado, I've found 11 fascinating royal articles for you to peruse the next time you need to scratch that strange history itch.
• "Businessman: Wikipedia must be responsible for slander published there". Eesti Rahvusringhääling. January 16, 2023. Retrieved January 17, 2023. Chairman of the board of NGO Wikimedia Estonia and Wikipedia administrator Ivo Kruusamägi referred to Pruunsild's statement of claim as noteworthy as it constitutes the first time Estonian Wikipedia has been taken to court. ... It is not yet clear whether the court will accept the action or when.
• Vallance, Chris (January 17, 2023). "Wikipedia needs different safety rules, says foundation". BBC. Retrieved January 17, 2023. Ms MacKinnon says it has caught in a net designed for the likes of Facebook and Instagram where decisions are centralised. The foundation believes in community decision making, and does not get involved with the articles, she says, but the bill could force it to intervene if a volunteer editor kept up an article which might break UK law, for example. "It forces the foundation to break the community model, and proactively take things down," she says.
• KM, Ashok (January 17, 2023). "'Wikipedia Not Completely Dependable' : Supreme Court Cautions Courts & Adjudicating Authorities". Live Law. Retrieved January 24, 2023. In a judgment delivered today, the Supreme Court cautioned the courts and adjudicating authorities against use of 'wikipedia' for legal dispute resolution.
• "From Infiltrating Wikipedia to Paying Trump Millions in Golf Deals, Saudis Whitewash Rights Record". Democracy Now!. January 17, 2023. Retrieved January 19, 2023. Meanwhile, an exposé has revealed that the Saudi government infiltrated Wikipedia to control information on the kingdom.
• Rauwerda, Annie (January 18, 2023). "Wikipedia's Redesign Is Barely Noticeable. That's the Point". Slate. Retrieved January 19, 2023. For all the hype, Vector 2022 isn't dramatically different—that's why it shares a name with the previous skin, Vector 2010. All the scaffolding is the same: Wikipedia is still Wikipedia, just with more whitespace, a more prominent search bar and language switcher, and a sticky table of contents.
• Perez, Sarah (January 18, 2023). "Wikipedia gets its first makeover in over a decade… and it's fairly subtle". TechCrunch. Retrieved January 19, 2023. Given the size of Wikipedia's readership, it's clear the organization was careful not to make disruptive changes. Today, Wikipedia offers over 58 million articles across more than 300 languages, which are viewed nearly 16 billion times every month, it said. The announcement also noted that no existing functionality was removed as a part of these changes — instead, the focus of the update was on usability improvements and modernizing the site.
• Kan, Michael (January 18, 2023). "Wikipedia Desktop Site Gets New Look, Its First in Over 10 Years". PCMag. Retrieved January 19, 2023. As you can see, the redesign reduces some of the clutter on the site for a cleaner look, which includes more white space. The search bar is also prominently featured at the top-center of the page, moving it from the top-right corner. In addition, the search bar will generate a preview image and description as you type in your query. In contrast, the old search bar would only try to autocomplete your query with some text.
• Pearl, Mike (January 18, 2023). "Yes, Wikipedia looks weird. Don't freak out". Mashable. Retrieved January 20, 2023. Perhaps your brain rejected all the new white space, or the way the "sticky" new table of contents hovers while you scroll. But also maybe you just hate change. There's no right way to react to a thing happening on the internet, so whining and nitpicking, along with inexplicable fear, are to be expected at a time like this.
• "Wikipedia gets a facelift after 10 years: A look at new interface and features". The Indian Express. January 19, 2023. Retrieved January 19, 2023. The new updated interface emphasises on usability and ease of sharing knowledge. The latest update has been rolled out on English Wikipedia and according to the platform it is operational on 94 per cent of the 318 language versions of the portal for all desktop users.
• "Awesome! Wikipedia gets its first makeover in 10 years; Check new features now". Hindustan Times. January 19, 2023. Retrieved January 20, 2023. The new interface also improves the reading experience for the user. Wikipedia articles will now have a maximum line width which means the paragraphs will appear less cluttered and it will make for a comfortable reading.

• Cohen, Noam (January 22, 2023). "The Culture Wars Look Different on Wikipedia". The Atlantic. Retrieved January 22, 2023. But in recent years, something has begun to change. Wikipedia's editors are no longer simply citing dated sources; instead, they are hashing out how someone would want to be understood. But even though these deliberations touch on some of the most controversial issues around—and reach conclusions that reverberate far beyond Wikipedia's pages—they are shockingly civil and thoughtful for the internet today.
• "Wikipedia Middle East editors ban shows risks for creators". Bangkok Post. January 26, 2023. Retrieved January 26, 2023. Beirut-based digital rights group SMEX and human rights group Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN) said that Saudi authorities had recruited Wikipedia's most reputed administrators in the country to control information about the kingdom.

February

• "PTA degrades Wikipedia services for not blocking 'sacrilegious content'". The Express Tribune. February 1, 2023. Retrieved February 2, 2023. "The restoration of the services of Wikipedia will be reconsidered subject to blocking/removal of the reported unlawful contents. PTA is committed to ensuring a safe online experience for all Pakistani citizens according to local laws," it further said.
• "Pakistan restricts access 'internet's encyclopedia' Wikipedia for 'unlawful conent'". Samaa TV. February 1, 2023. Retrieved February 6, 2023. PTA said Wikipedia may face a permanent block in Pakistan if the platform does not remove or block unlawful content as directed by PTA. However, it has been clarified that PTA will consider removing restrictions on Wikipedia only after compliance with PTA's directions.
• Keeler, Kyle (February 2, 2023). "How Wikipedia Erases Indigenous History". Slate. Retrieved February 6, 2023. Until Wikipedia accurately challenges colonial erasure and stops repeating colonial fantasies, we should be skeptical of the stories it tells us. We must be honest about the past. The future depends on it.
• Sabir Mir, Zainab (February 1, 2023). "Pakistan warns of blocking Wikipedia over non-removal of 'sacrilegious content'". Geo TV. Retrieved February 2, 2023. "It must be noted that were it the case of spreading hate or inciting violence, a ban would make sense, but since this is not the case and it's just a few articles the move is excessively counter-productive. You can ban information, but the move ended up proving bad for the country's image," Baig, the founder of Media Matters for Democracy, said.
• Singh, Manish (February 1, 2023). "Pakistan 'degrades' Wikipedia, warns of complete block over 'sacrilegious' content". TechCrunch. Retrieved February 2, 2023. The Pakistan Telecommunication Authority, the nation's telecom regulator, said Wednesday afternoon that it had approached Wikipedia to block or remove certain "blasphemous" content by issuing court orders, but said the online encyclopedia neither complied nor appeared before the authority. ... The regulator did not elaborate on what content it had asked Wikipedia to remove.
• Heady, Taylor Alexis (February 1, 2023). "TikTok User Claims He Uploads the Worst Photos Ever Taken of Celebrities to Their Wikipedias". Popcrush. Retrieved February 2, 2023. Why? He claims it's "because Wikipedia is a place for knowledge, not for looking sexy."
• David, Pride (February 1, 2023). "Wikipedia: the good, the bad and the ugly". Poynter Institute. Retrieved February 2, 2023. Based on the research we've reviewed, we can rate Wikipedia as "Mostly Legit." While it may not be 100% reliable, Wikipedia's collaborative team, editing rules and content policies make it reasonably reliable — in fact, at least as reliable as its competitor, the Encyclopedia Britannica.

• Bell, Torsten (February 4, 2023). "It's so easy to cheat with technology that even judges are doing it – Everyone uses Wikipedia, but should it really be affecting what happens in court?". The Guardian. Retrieved February 5, 2023. But pesky academics have got judges bang to rights, showing that fiddling around with Wikipedia can materially affect legal proceedings. Their research found that not only were Irish supreme court decisions with Wikipedia pages more likely to be cited by high court judges as a precedent for their judgments, but the Wikipedia text even influenced the language used in those judgments. Poor judges, caught redhanded.
• "Pakistan blocks Wikipedia over 'sacrilegious' content". Deutsche Welle. February 4, 2023. Retrieved February 6, 2023. The regulator's decision triggered an outcry, and free speech campaigners have highlighted a pattern of rising government censorship of Pakistan's printed and electronic media.
• Gul, Ayaz (February 4, 2023). "Pakistan Bans Wikipedia Over 'Sacrilegious Content'". Voice of America. Retrieved February 6, 2023. The ban on Wikipedia drew criticism from Pakistani social media activists and users, demanding the government review the decision and denouncing it as "regressive" and "harmful" for the country's global image.
• "Pakistan blocks Wikipedia: Report". The Indian Express. February 4, 2023. Retrieved February 6, 2023. Given the intentional failure on part of the platform to comply with the directions of PTA, the services of Wikipedia were degraded for 48 hours with the direction to block/remove the reported contents. The restoration of Wikipedia's services will be reconsidered if the reported unlawful content is blocked/removed, the spokesman said.
• Zaccaro, Maria (February 4, 2023). "Pakistan blocks Wikipedia for 'blasphemous content'". BBC. Retrieved February 6, 2023. PTA spokesperson Malahat Obaid said Wikipedia failed to respond to "repeated correspondence" over the removal of "blasphemous content". "They did remove some of the material but not all," he added, confirming that the website would remain blocked until "all the objectionable material" was removed.
• Ahmed, Munir (February 6, 2023). "Pakistan blocks Wikipedia, says it hurt Muslim sentiments". Associated Press. Retrieved February 6, 2023. The Lahore-based Digital Rights Foundation earlier called the Wikipedia ban an affront to Pakistanis' right to access information and a mockery of the country's commitment to uphold its human rights obligations.
• Singh, Manish (February 6, 2023). "Wikipedia unblocked in Pakistan after Prime Minister's intervention". TechCrunch. Retrieved February 9, 2023. Shehbaz Sharif, the Prime Minister of Pakistan, directed the unblocking order, calling the censorship on Wikipedia "not a suitable measure to restrict access to some objectionable contents/sacrilegious matter on it." "The unintended consequences of this blanket ban, therefore, outweigh its benefits," his office wrote in a letter, which was shared publicly on Twitter.
• Ahmed, Munir (February 7, 2023). "Wikipedia Unblocked in Pakistan After Being Banned for 'Blasphemous' Content". Time. Retrieved February 8, 2023. Hours later, Pakistan's Information Minister Marriyum Aurangzeb said that premier Shahbaz Sharif had ordered the immediate restoration of Wikipedia, a move welcomed by Pakistanis.
• Andrei, Mihai (February 7, 2023). "Wikipedia is 21 and it shapes the world. But how reliable is it?". ZME Science. Retrieved February 8, 2023. In conclusion, Wikipedia can be a valuable source for information, but you should use it with caution, and it's always a good idea to cross-check information with external sources, and be aware of the potential for bias and inaccuracies.
• "Pakistan PM orders to unblock Wikipedia website". Deccan Herald. February 7, 2023. Retrieved February 8, 2023. Minister of Information and Broadcasting Marriyum Aurangzeb posted the order to her Twitter account, which stated: "The Prime Minister is pleased to direct that the website (Wikipedia) may be restored with immediate effect."
• Aamir, Adnan (February 7, 2023). "Pakistan bans, then unblocks, Wikipedia amid digital freedom fight". Nikkei Asia. Retrieved April 1, 2023. The brief Wikipedia blockage prompted a warning from the National Commission for Human Rights, which termed the site an essential part of the digital information landscape in Pakistan. The ban, it said, violated citizens' right to access information.
• Hussain, Abid (February 8, 2023). "Wikipedia ban in Pakistan over alleged blasphemous content lifted". Al Jazeera. Retrieved April 11, 2023. On February 1, Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) announced it was "degrading" access to Wikipedia in the country due to the presence of "sacrilegious content", giving the website 48 hours to remove them. It did not specify which content it found sacrilegious. Two days later, the PTA claimed there was no response from Wikipedia and blocked the website, leading to widespread condemnation and outrage in the country.
• Carolan, Mary (February 8, 2023). "Judges and academics in fresh row over research claiming Wikipedia used for judgments". The Irish Times. Retrieved February 8, 2023. Following the release in recent weeks of an amended version of the paper, Mr Justice Richard Humphreys told The Irish Times that the "extensive" changes suggest the core conclusion in the original paper was "problematical".
• Bindman, Dan (February 8, 2023). "Wikipedia information "undermining quality of judgments"". legalfutures. Retrieved February 9, 2023. The researchers believed only judges of the High Court, or their staff – rather than appeal or supreme courts – were using Wikipedia articles for their research. They highlighted pressure of work on High Court judges as a possible cause of the difference.
• Eichner, Itamar (February 12, 2023). "Wikipedia 'intentionally' distorts history of the Holocaust, study claims". Ynet. Retrieved February 13, 2023. "Due to this group's zealous handiwork, Wikipedia's articles on the Holocaust in Poland minimize Polish antisemitism, exaggerate the Poles' role in saving Jews, insinuate that most Jews supported Communism and conspired with Communists to betray Poles, blame Jews for their own persecution, and inflate Jewish collaboration with the Nazis," Prof. Grabowski wrote.
• "Research Reveals Wikipedia's Intentional Distortion of the History of the Holocaust". Chapman University. February 9, 2023. Retrieved February 13, 2023 – via San Diego Jewish World. The paper, "Wikipedia's Intentional Distortion of the History of the Holocaust" published today in The Journal of Holocaust Research.
• "Wikipedia ban shows "inconsistent attempts by Pakistani authorities to restrict internet access": Report". Asian News International. February 12, 2023. Retrieved February 15, 2023 – via ThePrint. The ban on Wikipedia suggests that "Islamist groups and their radical ideologies continue to hold considerable sway in Pakistan, particularly on the matter of blasphemy, irrespective of which political party holds power in Islamabad," Al Arabiya Post reported. The allegations of blasphemy offence often lead to mob violence and attacks in Pakistan.
• Harrison, Stephen (February 13, 2023). "Why Wikipedia Is So Tough on Bigfoot". Slate. Retrieved February 15, 2023. The internet encyclopedia defines cryptozoology as "a pseudoscience or subculture that searches for and studies unknown, legendary, or extinct animals" such as Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, the chupacabra, and other so-called cryptids. But on the talk page that sits behind the wiki article, some users are up in arms about that specific wording.
• Aderet, Ofer (February 14, 2023). "'Jews Helped the Germans Out of Revenge or Greed': New Research Documents How Wikipedia Distorts the Holocaust". Haaretz. Retrieved February 15, 2023. Grabowski and Klein's study did not find a link between the government or any other official authority in Poland and the manner in which the Wikipedia articles were edited. Nevertheless, Grabowski and Klein cite an email exchange leaked last year that indicates that Polish officials at the highest level were aware of Wikipedia's influence on public discourse and its impact in shaping the memory of the Holocaust.
• Konieczny, Piotr (February 15, 2023). "My, wolontariusze Wikipedii, nie jesteśmy opłacani przez PiS, KGB czy Mosad" [We, Wikipedia volunteers, are not paid by PiS, KGB or Mossad]. Gazeta Wyborcza (in Polish). Retrieved February 17, 2023. [Translated with Google Translate] I could go on, but why? The trend of errors and understatements in the article I refer to is probably quite clear. Unfortunately, this is what happens when, on a daily basis, reliable researchers take up a field (here: new media - Wikipedia) in which they are not experts, and what is worse - they base their research on a very unreliable source, which is a former Wikipedia volunteer with the pseudonym "Icewhiz".
• Siddiqui, Zuha (February 20, 2023). "Pakistan's three-day Wikipedia ban sends a "dangerous" message". Rest of World. Retrieved February 22, 2023. Wikipedia ban was reversed within 72 hours, Pakistani tech investors and activists told Rest of World that such a move sends a "dangerous" message to the world, and could drive away foreign investors or multinational companies.
• "Over 40 later banned sockpuppets created or revised nine related articles on the Adani family and businesses, says Wikipedia". Press Trust of India. February 21, 2023. Retrieved February 22, 2023 – via The Hindu. Wikipedia said billionaires have a history of apparent undeclared paid editing on Wikipedia, including Kenneth C. Griffin, Robert T. Brockman, Robert F. Smith, and several Russian oligarchs. A few near- or former-billionaires, including Elizabeth Holmes, Greg Lindberg, Jeffrey Epstein, and Peter Nygard have also appeared to hire people for undeclared paid editing, it said.
• "Paid Users, Including Employees, Improperly Edited Adani Articles, Says Wikipedia Newspaper". The Wire (India). February 21, 2023. Retrieved February 22, 2023. Citing that the company lost about $67 billion in net worth, the article asks, "Did he and his employees also try to "con" Wikipedia readers with non-neutral PR versions of related Wikipedia articles? Almost certainly they did."
• Chung, Andrew (February 21, 2023). "U.S. Supreme Court snubs Wikipedia bid to challenge NSA surveillance". Reuters. Retrieved February 22, 2023. Represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, Wikimedia Foundation sued in 2015 challenging the legality of the NSA's "Upstream" surveillance of foreign targets through the "suspicionless" collection and searching of internet traffic on data transmission lines flowing into and out of the United States.
• Williams, Chris (February 21, 2023). "The Supreme Court Just Prevented One Of The Most High Stakes Encyclopedia Battles Ever From Happening". Above the Law. Retrieved February 22, 2023. You know things have to be spectacularly bad when the librarians of the internet think something is worth going to court over.
• "Adani Group used paid editors to 'clean' its Wikipedia entries: Report". The Siasat Daily. February 21, 2023. Retrieved February 22, 2023. "Many of them edited several of the articles and added non-neutral material or puffery. A declared paid editor, using a company IP address, completely rewrote the Adani Group article. Others removed warnings about conflict-of-interest editing. Some created articles by unusual methods that avoided Wikipedia's quality control systems," the report says.
• "Fresh blow to Adani after Wikipedia claims entries on group manipulated". Business Standard. February 23, 2023. Retrieved February 23, 2023. In its report, The Signpost alleged that over 40 sock puppets or undeclared paid editors created or revised 9 articles on the Adani family and their businesses. Some of edits on Adani were by company employees, the internet-based encylopedia alleged, listing IP addresses that edited information on Adani, his wife Priti, son Karan, nephew Pranav and group companies.
• Ro, Crystal (February 25, 2023). "19 Jaw-Dropping Celebrity "Facts" People Learned After Reading Their Wikipedia Pages". BuzzFeed. Retrieved March 1, 2023. BTW, this should probably go without saying, but because this information all comes from Wikipedia, take it with a grain of salt, ya know?
• Corfield, Gareth (February 25, 2023). "Wikipedia is not woke, insists founder Jimmy Wales". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved March 16, 2023. However, Wikipedia itself is often a lightning rod for criticism because of its stance on the big issues of the day – or, more accurately, the stance of its legions of editors, who critics routinely label as armchair keyboard warriors with a left-wing viewpoint that colours everything they write. ... Wales, the man who adorns the adverts, may resist accusations that his creation is "woke". But as long as it is where the public goes for information, the controversies over the site – and who is in control of its content – will never go away.
• "Russian court fines Wikipedia over military 'misinformation'". Reuters. February 28, 2023. Retrieved March 1, 2023. The organisation said it may appeal the ruling but that it had not yet made a decision.
• Elia-Shalev, Asaf (February 28, 2023). "Wikipedia's 'Supreme Court' tackles alleged conspiracy to distort articles on Holocaust". Jewish Telegraphic Agency. Retrieved March 3, 2023. Normally, mistakes on Wikipedia, whether intentional or not, can be quickly fixed by experienced editors who deploy a set of rules regarding sourcing and style. But in this case, the alleged distortionists know Wikipedia's mechanisms well enough to at least appear to follow the rules and are willing to spend time arguing with other editors who step in to intervene.

March

• Anon (March 1, 2023). "Who watches the Wikipedia editors?". The Critic (modern magazine). Retrieved March 1, 2023. As it turned out, there are plenty of weirdos — and "weirdo" is an apt description for most regular Wikipedia editors — who were keen to spend long hours editing an online encyclopaedia for no fee and no credit.
• Villena, Cole (March 1, 2023). "Depths of Wikipedia's Annie Rauwerda Is Obsessed With Accessible Information". Nashville Scene. Retrieved March 1, 2023. The editing community is really inspiring to me, because it's all these very, very smart people who can't handle information being incomplete or wrong, and so they get addicted to creating the encyclopedia together," Rauwerda says. "It's really wholesome people who expect nothing and just care so much.
• Richardson, Anna (March 1, 2023). "Politics in Latin America Class Takes on Wikipedia". Hamilton College. Retrieved March 2, 2023. "Students loved being able to see how many people read the article after they made edits. Many talked about how usually, when [they] write a paper, nobody else sees it, but on Wikipedia, all these other people got to look at [their] work," Sullivan explained.
• Fuhrer, Armin (March 2, 2023). "Historiker erkennen auf Wikipedia »Holocaust-Verzerrung«" [Historians Recognize “Holocaust Distortion” on Wikipedia]. Der Spiegel (in German). Archived from the original on March 2, 2023. Retrieved March 2, 2023. [Translated with Google Translate] Jan Grabowksi observes: "Since the publication of our article, there has been a lot of paraphrasing activity on Wikipedia," he told SPIEGEL. "Some items we mentioned are now being rewritten, and some others may not be visible at all."
• Sidman, Fern (March 2, 2023). "Conspiracy to Falsify Facts About the Holocaust by Polish Editors for Wikipedia Being Investigated by Top Brass". Jewish Voice. Retrieved March 11, 2023. Typically, disputes among Wikipedia editors are resolved through community consensus mechanisms, but occasionally those mechanisms fail and allegations are brought to Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee, a panel of elected editors known as Wikipedia's Supreme Court.
• Domagała-Pereira, Katarzyna (March 3, 2023). "Der Spiegel o fałszowaniu historii Holokaustu w Wikipedii" [Der Spiegel on Wikipedia's falsification of the Holocaust story]. Deutsche Welle (in Polish). Retrieved March 11, 2023. [Translated with Google Translate] Der Spiegel reports that Grabowski and Klein refer to figures of about 2 million murdered non-Jewish Poles and 3 million Polish Jews. However, a group of Polish Wikipedia authors claim that the number of murdered non-Jewish Poles was 3 million, reports the German magazine.
• "The Wikipedia dilemma". The Nation (Pakistan). March 4, 2023. Retrieved March 4, 2023. Recently, Pakistan banned Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia over some blasphemous material. It is a matter of fact that Pakistan has been quite serious about such content but on the other hand, the free site of information has surely been a blessing for the state.
• Tunk, Carola (March 6, 2023). "Forscher: Wikipedia-Gruppe „verzerrt" absichtlich Holocaust-Geschichte in Polen" [Researcher: Wikipedia group intentionally 'distorting' Holocaust history in Poland]. Berliner Zeitung (in German). Archived from the original on March 6, 2023. Retrieved March 7, 2023. [Translated with Google Translate] Who is responsible for the intentional falsification of history on Wikipedia? I don't know these people, so I don't know who they are. We have no evidence, but it is likely that these people are motivated by ideological motives. According to a certain methodology that has been seen left and right in Poland, namely that our past is glorious, we are not to blame and so on. We have no evidence that this small group of people doing what we write about is in any way connected to the Polish government - but they are doing exactly what the Polish government would like to see.
• "Majority of Wikipedia editors are still men - so how is the online encyclopaedia addressing the issue?". Evening Standard. March 7, 2023. Retrieved March 13, 2023. Aversion to conflict and an impression of the site's community as misogynistic were both cited as reasons why women don't edit Wikipedia, by former Wikimedia Foundation director Sue Gardner.
• Olbert, Frank (March 11, 2023). "Verzerrte Enzyklopädie: Wie auf Wikipedia versucht wird, Polens Rolle in der Schoa reinzuwaschen" [Distorted Encyclopedia: How Wikipedia tries to whitewash Poland's role in the Shoah]. Jüdische Allgemeine (in German). Retrieved March 11, 2023. [Translated with Google Translate] In their conclusion, Grabowski and Klein urge the administrators and the Wikipedia Foundation to pay more attention to the contributions on the platform. A reference could be the Croatian Wikipedia, which had been hijacked by right-wing agitators, but was recaptured and improved following the intervention of the foundation and the community mobilized by it.
• "Wikipedia denies political bias despite censoring marriage supporters". Christian Institute. March 11, 2023. Retrieved March 13, 2023. When referring to individuals who claim to be the opposite sex, Wikipedia's style guide pushes editors to use words that "reflect the person's most recent expressed gender self-identification". It also prevents editors from mentioning a person's name associated with their biological sex, even in quotations, if they were not "notable" under that name.
• Grinzweig Jacobsson, Anna (March 12, 2023). "Fler borde ifrågasätta Wikipedias Förintelsefakta" [More people should question Wikipedia's Holocaust facts]. Göteborgs-Posten (in Swedish). Retrieved March 12, 2023. [Translated with Google Translate] The report was released on February 10, quickly spread widely and has attracted attention also in Wikipedia groups, where they have already begun to correct certain factual errors that the two researchers drew attention to. It has also been pointed out that a similar systematic falsification work is going on at Wikipedia when it comes to information about global warming.
• "Wikipedias forfalskning av historien om Holocaust" [Wikipedia's falsification of the history of the Holocaust]. Norge Idag (in Norwegian). March 17, 2023. Retrieved March 26, 2023. [Translated with Google Translate] But Wikipedia takes the accusations seriously. The Arbitration Committee, or ArbCom, decided to look into the claims without receiving a formal request. No one can remember the committee taking such a step during the nearly two decades of its existence.
• Alt Miller, Yvette (March 19, 2023). "Wikipedia Editors Deliberately Distorted Holocaust Articles". Aish HaTorah. Retrieved March 19, 2023. These revelations about Wikipedia's Holocaust coverage come in the context of growing ignorance about the Holocaust around the world. One recent survey found that 63% of Americans do not know that six million Jews were murdered in the Holocaust.
• Retzloff, Bridget; Kelly, Katy (March 20, 2023). "Is Wikipedia a good source? 2 college librarians explain when to use the online encyclopedia – and when to avoid it". The Conversation. Retrieved March 20, 2023. Here are what we see as the main pros and cons to college students using Wikipedia as a source of information in their research and assignments, though anyone can consider these tips when using Wikipedia.
• "Making Wikipedia Safer: Enforcement Guidelines for Wikimedia Universal Code of Conduct provide a model for governing online behavior". Asian News International. March 23, 2023. Retrieved March 24, 2023. While user behavior policies have long existed on the site, there has been no universal standard for acceptable behavior across all Wikimedia projects.
• Cadorniga, Carlos "Callie" (March 25, 2023). "New Streamer's Wikipedia Page Has Empty "Controversy" Section Just In Case". Hard Drive. Retrieved March 26, 2023. These things are just inevitable; might as well save some time now," said Wikipedia editor Bryan Jobs. "He hasn't done anything at all wrong yet, but it's only a matter of time. I know you're probably thinking 'but this streamer just plays Mario games with his friends, how could he possibly do something insanely problematic?' Give it a week.
• Norberg, Sara (March 27, 2023). "Closing Wikipedia's Gender Gap, One Edit at a Time". Tufts Now. Retrieved March 31, 2023. From an informational perspective, it's important to get the right information, and it's our responsibility, if we change it, to do that," said Ray Feinleib, A25, who is majoring in English. "I'm excited to contribute, even if it's just a small edit. Knowing that someone will be better informed because of the change is a good feeling.
• Kirkpatrick, David D. (March 27, 2023). "The Dirty Secrets of a Smear Campaign". The New Yorker. Retrieved April 4, 2023. To pressure others to shun Lord Energy, Alp added dubious allegations about the company to the Wikipedia entries for Credit Suisse and for an Algerian oil monopoly.
• Germain, Thomas (March 29, 2023). "Listen to Wikipedia's Cute New Sound Logo". Gizmodo. Retrieved March 30, 2023. The winning sound features recordings of pages turning in a book, mouse clicks, and keyboard taps over a bed of warm synthesizer tones.
• Porter, Jon (March 29, 2023). "Prepare your ears for Wikipedia's 'sound of all human knowledge'". The Verge. Retrieved March 30, 2023. With more and more information being delivered via audio sources like voice assistants, the Wikimedia Foundation thought it was time to adopt a so-called "sound logo" for Wikipedia and its other projects.
• Hollender, Alex (March 30, 2023). "Take a peek behind the process of redesigning Wikipedia's desktop interface". Fast Company. Retrieved March 30, 2023. With this in mind it becomes clear that any Wikipedia article is only as accurate as the sources from which the facts were gathered. You can of course question the motives or skill level of the editors, who are the ones going out, gathering the facts, and then weaving them together into coherent articles.
• Hunt, Simon (March 30, 2023). "Will Wikipedia be written by AI? Founder Jimmy Wales is thinking about it". Evening Standard. Retrieved March 30, 2023. "The discussion in the Wikipedia community that I've seen so far is…people are cautious in the sense that we're aware that the existing models are not good enough but also intrigued because there seems like there's a lot of possibility here," Wales said.
• Gunn, Aidan (March 30, 2023). "Students, faculty learn to edit Wikipedia articles". Campus Current. Retrieved March 31, 2023. "I hope that it's empowering," The event's organizer, Reverdy, said. "[I hope] that [the event] encourages folks to get involved with something that they feel upset about or passionate about, and that they want to contribute to or make a difference in. Because there's so many opportunities to do that."
• Munsell, Mike (March 31, 2023). "Wikipedia has a climatetech problem". RMI (energy organization). Retrieved April 1, 2023. That's where you come in. Canary readers include some of the smartest, most knowledgeable climatetech professionals out there, and I'm going to nudge you all to try your hand at honing Wikipedia pages related to climate, especially ones that cover advancements in clean energy and climate solutions.

April

• Saeed, Ramna (April 4, 2023). "Pakistan's recent Wikipedia ban sparks controversy over blasphemy laws and freedom of speech". Global Voices. Retrieved April 4, 2023. Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif announced a committee to investigate the incident and suggest alternative technical methods for removing or restricting access to objectionable content posted on sites such as Wikipedia. This action was taken in consideration of social, cultural, and religious sensitivities in Pakistan.
• Harrison, Stephen (April 5, 2023). "Wikipedia's "Supreme Court" to Review Polish-Jewish History During WWII". Slate. Retrieved April 6, 2023. New Wikipedians have taken an interest in this subject matter, contributors from outside of what one user described as the "usual cartels." That's the hope: Once an issue has been spotlighted by the outside world, Wikipedians are capable of handling it themselves.
• McKeown, Jonah (April 8, 2023). "Wikipedia had the wrong Vatican City flag for years. Now incorrect flags are everywhere". Catholic News Agency. Retrieved April 9, 2023. "That's kind of common with other countries too, especially those that don't really take pains to standardize their design. [Nowadays] a flagmaker is likely to go to a source like Wikipedia, and it may vary in its accuracy," Becker told CNA.
• "Is Wikipedia Next?". Russian Life. April 9, 2023. Retrieved April 10, 2023. Roskomnadzor, the federal service that supervises communications in Russia, recently ordered the deletion of 133 Wikipedia pages, claiming the website was anti-Russian and "fake news" for publishing articles containing facts about the war in Ukraine. Now, government and judiciary officials are discussing a possible ban on the online encyclopedia.
• "Russia Fines Wikipedia Owner Over 'Fake Information' About Ukraine Invasion". Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. April 13, 2023. Retrieved April 18, 2023. Wikimedia has previously said information that Russian authorities have complained about was well-sourced and in line with Wikipedia standards.
• "Russian court fines Wikipedia for article about Ukraine war". ABC News. April 13, 2023. Retrieved April 18, 2023. Tass said Roskomnadzor will label Wikimedia in search engines as a violator of Russian law, and more action against specific articles is planned.
• Chernova, Anna; Dmitracova, Olesya (April 14, 2023). "Russian court fines Wikipedia owner for article related to Ukraine invasion". CNN. Retrieved April 19, 2023. There have been debates in Russia about banning Wikipedia. Asked about the possibility of shutting down the website in the country, the Kremlin said last week that a Russian alternative needed to be developed first.
• Yusuf, Hosea (April 17, 2023). "Wikipedia To Bridge Digital Gap Between Teachers, Students". Leadership. Retrieved April 18, 2023. The teachers were trained on effective usage of Wikipedia as a teaching and learning tool, research and retrieval skills, content creation, and evaluation of information.
• Marrow, Alexander (April 18, 2023). "Russia not planning Wikipedia block for now, minister says". Reuters. Retrieved April 19, 2023. Wikipedia is one of the few surviving independent sources of information in Russian since a state crackdown on online content intensified after Moscow sent its armed forces into Ukraine. "We are not blocking Wikipedia yet, there are no such plans for now," Interfax news agency quoted digital affairs minister Maksut Shadaev as saying.
• O'Donnell, Orla (April 18, 2023). "Study claims no 'Wikipedia effect' in rulings by Irish judges". RTÉ.ie. Retrieved April 19, 2023. In the new research, using different methodology, the authors say their comparison showed citations of the cases mentioned on Wikipedia and those in the control group rose by the same amount, meaning, they say, there was no effect whatsoever from the cases being mentioned on Wikipedia.
• Carolan, Mary (April 18, 2023). "New study rejects research suggestions that Wikipedia content shapes High Court judgments". The Irish Times. Retrieved April 19, 2023. Mr Justice David Barniville said those with practical knowledge of judicial decision-making "will know that the claim that judges rely on Wikipedia in preparing their judgments in any material way is plainly wrong".
• Phelan, Shane (April 18, 2023). "Study by judge rejects research suggesting Irish judiciary uses Wikipedia as a source in rulings". Irish Independent. Retrieved April 19, 2023. Mr Justice Ferriter said the Humphreys study confirmed empirically what any High Court judge or barrister or solicitor would have explained if asked: that case law cited in Irish court judgments comes from parties' written or oral submissions and not from Wikipedia.
• "Minister says Russia not planning to block Wikipedia for now". Firstpost. April 19, 2023. Retrieved April 19, 2023. A Moscow court fined Wikimedia Foundation, the company that owns Wikipedia, 800,000 roubles ($9,777) on Tuesday for what Russian authorities claimed was a failure to delete content that was seen to be encouraging train hopping, in which a person rides on the side or top of a train.
• "Moscow fines Wikipedia owner $18,000 for Ukraine article - TASS". Reuters. April 20, 2023. Retrieved April 20, 2023. Russia has hit the Wikimedia Foundation with a string of fines in recent months, but is "not yet" planning to block the service, the minister of digital affairs said this week.
• Cuenca, Anna (April 20, 2023). "The British physicist making women scientists visible online". Phys.org. Retrieved April 21, 2023. Wade, who is now part of a network of women editors and leads workshops on how to write for Wikipedia, says a person's presence and their work on the internet means they are discoverable.
• Hawkins, Eleanor (April 27, 2023). "Wikipedia's influence grows". Axios. Retrieved April 28, 2023. The content found on Wikipedia is becoming even more important as new generative artificial intelligence tools are being trained on data from the site. ... Editing or updating a Wiki page can be an epic saga of anonymous negotiations — but it can be done, as long as you understand how to appropriately engage with the Wikipedia editor community.
• Ndu-Okeke, Michael (April 27, 2023). "Russian court fines Wikipedia again over Ukraine war article". Peoples Gazette. Retrieved April 28, 2023. The report stated that this is the seventh fine imposed on Wikimedia in 2023, for not removing prohibited information. The fines now total 8.4 million rubles.
• "Russian court fines Wikipedia again for article about war in Ukraine". Reuters. April 27, 2023. Retrieved April 28, 2023. Wikipedia is one of the few surviving independent sources of information in Russian since a state crackdown on online content intensified after Moscow invaded Ukraine last year.
• "Madras HC Sets Aside Special NIA Court Order That Had Relied on Wikipedia". The Wire (India). April 27, 2023. Retrieved April 28, 2023. ...it is clear that Hon'ble Supreme Court has put in a caveat and caution against use of such sources (Wikipedia) in legal dispute resolution. Acer India and Hewlett Packard / Lenevo principles make it clear that on this score, the trial Court fell in error i.e., fell in error in relying on Wikipedia and, therefore, the matter has to go back to trial Court...
• "Madras High Court tells courts not to use Wikipedia as source for legal dispute resolution". India Legal. April 27, 2023. Retrieved April 28, 2023. The Division Bench agreed to the petitioner's claim that the impugned order explicitly relied on Wikipedia to conclude the aim and objective of the entity. It further took note of the fact that the impugned order was silent with respect to the case laws cited by Baqavi and had merely brushed them aside.
• Vallance, Chris; Gerken, Tom (April 28, 2023). "Wikipedia will not perform Online Safety Bill age checks". BBC. Retrieved April 28, 2023. Rebecca MacKinnon, of the Wikimedia Foundation, which supports the website, says it would "violate our commitment to collect minimal data about readers and contributors". A senior figure in Wikimedia UK fears the site could be blocked as a result.
• Dhiman, Mehak (April 28, 2023). "Can't Rely on Wikipedia: Madras High Court Remands Case to Trail Court". Law Trend. Retrieved April 28, 2023. High Court referred to the case of Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore Vs. M/s.Acer India Pvt. Ltd. where the Supreme Court held that Wikipedia is an online encyclopaedia and information can be entered therein by any person and as such it may not be authentic.
• Milmo, Dan (April 28, 2023). "UK readers may lose access to Wikipedia amid online safety bill requirements". The Guardian. Retrieved April 29, 2023. However, there is also a question mark over whether any of wikipedia's content would meet the definition of pornographic material in the bill.
• Karabus, Jude (April 28, 2023). "Online Safety Bill age checks? We won't do 'em, says Wikipedia". The Register. Retrieved April 30, 2023. In a statement to national UK broadcaster the BBC this morning, Rebecca MacKinnon, vice president of Global Advocacy at Wikimedia, said that to perform such verification would "violate our commitment to collect minimal data about readers and contributors."
• de Quetteville, Harry (April 28, 2023). "How Wikipedia became too powerful". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved April 30, 2023. This insistence on sourcing is key to understanding Wikipedia's identity: it is not in itself a producer of knowledge, verified and vouchsafed; rather it is a distillation of facts stated elsewhere, with the hope that anonymous, crowd-sourced scrutiny will eject the false and retain the true.
• Matthew, Field (April 28, 2023). "Wikipedia could be taken offline in the UK". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved April 30, 2023. Wikipedia could be shut down for UK internet users under the Online Safety Bill, a charity that helps run the internet encyclopaedia has claimed.
• Wallace, Abby (April 28, 2023). "Wikipedia won't comply with Online Safety Bill if passed, its charity warns". City A.M. Retrieved April 30, 2023. Crompton-Reid said introducing any age checks would "violate our commitment to collect minimal data about readers and contributors".
• Griffin, Andrew (April 29, 2023). "Wikipedia could soon be banned in UK over upcoming age verification rules". The Independent. Retrieved April 30, 2023. Wikipedia's specific objections come to parts of the bill that require websites that include content that could be harmful to children to include age verification checks. The Wikimedia Foundation, which runs Wikipedia, said that it fears that some content – such as educational content about sexuality – could be included in that.
• Solomons, Adam (April 29, 2023). "Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales says 'Twitter is making Elon Musk stupid' after billionaire's 'left-wing bias' claim". LBC. Retrieved April 30, 2023. Musk tweeted criticism of the site last December amid controversy around Wikipedia editors who considered deleting articles about Hunter Biden's laptop. The Twitter and SpaceX entrepreneur wrote: "Wikipedia has a non-trivial left-wing bias."
• Shah, Saqib (April 29, 2023). "Wikipedia refuses to carry out Online Safety Bill age checks". Evening Standard. Retrieved April 30, 2023. However, the government has said that it is unlikely Wikipedia would be classed as a category one service, those that would be subject to the bill's strictest rules.
• Frost, Caroline (April 29, 2023). "Jimmy Wales Says "Reading Too Much Twitter Has Made Elon Musk Stupid"". Deadline Hollywood. Retrieved April 30, 2023. The Wikipedia founder was responding to a recent episode where Musk objected to suggestions of deleting an entry regarding the "Twitter files" (Musk's public release of company documents). While the deletion never happened, for Wales, it was a revealing insight into the Twitter owner's limited understanding.
• Kumar, Suresh (April 30, 2023). "Don't rely on sites like Wikipedia to write verdicts: Madras HC". The Times of India. Retrieved April 30, 2023. However, a division bench of Justice M Sundar and Justice M Nirmal Kumar disapproved of the special court's conclusion and observed that courts must refrain from relying on crowd-sourced websites like Wikipedia in legal dispute resolution.

May

• Woodcock, Claire (May 2, 2023). "AI is Tearing Wikipedia Apart". Vice. Retrieved May 2, 2023. The current draft policy notes that anyone unfamiliar with the risks of large language models should avoid using them to create Wikipedia content, because it can open the Wikimedia Foundation up to libel suits and copyright violations—both of which the nonprofit gets protections from but the Wikipedia volunteers do not.
• Staddon, John (May 2, 2023). "WikiBias: How Wikipedia erases "fringe theories" and enforces conformity". Minding The Campus. Retrieved May 3, 2023. It turns out that the Wikipedia editorial system, organized in a complicated way that I confess I do not fully understand, classifies some positions as fringe: "the theory that a genetic link exists between race and intelligence is enough of a minority viewpoint in the scientific consensus that it falls under Wikipedia's definition of a fringe theory." Fringe theories are to be excluded from Wikipedia, apparently.
• Sharon, K Sherly (May 2, 2023). "Hyderabad: Over 200 attend 3-day Wiki Conference India 2023". The Siasat Daily. Retrieved May 3, 2023. Wikipedia said in a press release that Indian volunteers are integral and valued contributors to the website, which is available in 24 languages spoken across India.
• Stojanovski, Filip (May 11, 2023). "Creative initiatives add new content from Central and South Eastern Europe to Wikipedia". Global Voices. Retrieved June 28, 2023. Since 2020, Wikimedia Polska has been implementing the long-term Wikiszkoła (Wiki-school) program, which uses small grants to engage teachers and students to develop various activities and projects.
• Mayer, Grace (May 15, 2023). "Wikipedia cofounder slams Elon Musk for caving to Turkey's government and censoring tweets, says Wikipedia fought similar demands and won". Business Insider. Retrieved May 19, 2023. From 2017 to 2020, the Turkish government blocked access to Wikipedia after an entry on the website said the country was a sponsor of the Islamic State and Al-Qaeda terrorist groups, Insider previously reported.
• Kleinman, Zoe (May 16, 2023). "Twitter wrong to block tweets during Turkey election - Wikipedia founder". BBC News. Retrieved May 19, 2023. Wikipedia and Twitter are clearly very different services - there is no 'tell us what you think' box on the online encyclopedia which Mr Wales said made moderation a lot less complex.
• Elia-Shalev, Asaf (May 22, 2023). "Wikipedia bans editors but sidesteps broader action in Holocaust distortion row". The Times of Israel. Retrieved May 22, 2023. In keeping with Wikipedia's accountability framework and to the dismay of the study's authors, the committee didn't take a position on the underlying dispute over Polish antisemitism and complicity with the Nazis. The committee instead concluded that then editors did not adhere to the community's code of conduct.
• ShahBano Ijaz, Syeda (May 29, 2023). "How Conflicts and Population Loss Led to the Rise of English Wikipedia's Credibility". American Political Science Association. Retrieved May 30, 2023. A close examination of the content of selected Wikipedia articles, their publicly available editing history, as well as the comments made by the editors, allows Steinsson to show that a change in the interpretation of Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View (NPOV) guideline affected the nature of content in its articles.
• Stockton, Ben (May 30, 2023). "Cop28 president's team accused of Wikipedia 'greenwashing'". The Guardian. Retrieved May 30, 2023. Work by Al Jaber's team on his and the climate summit's Wikipedia entries include adding a quote from an editorial that said Al Jaber – the United Arab Emirates minister for industry and advanced technology – was "precisely the kind of ally the climate movement needs".
• Sforza, Teri (May 30, 2023). "Who's fact-checking Wikipedia editors who distort, misinform?". The Orange County Register. Retrieved May 31, 2023. Punishable by imprisonment of up to three years, as well as a fine, the law aims to protect Poland from 'being slandered as a state and as a nation.' A cadre of colorfully named, and mostly anonymous, editors set to work (the aforementioned Piotrus, Xx236, Volunteer Marek, GizzyCatBella, etc.). It has been an ongoing battle for years, with one step forward and two steps back.
• Pandey, Kamya (May 31, 2023). "The Power of a Wikipedia Page for Your Business: A Step-by-Step Guide". Jumpstart. Retrieved June 7, 2023. The one thing that builds trust between your company and its potential customers is having its own Wikipedia page. It is the first thing that shows up when someone looks up your company (besides your website of course!) and gives potential customers all the information they might need about your business. Another major plus point of having a Wikipedia page is that it positively influences the search engine optimization (SEO) ranking of your website. Since the Wiki page has backlinks to the company's website, it makes your company's website show up higher in Google search results.

June

• Tonsing, Suanmuanlian (June 1, 2023). "Manipur & Wikipedia: How Kuki-Zo's Digital Inequity Has Caused a Narrative Shift". The Quint. Retrieved June 5, 2023. Due to the lack of representation worldwide, the distortion of facts and removal of information on Wikipedia pose a serious problem for the tribals in Manipur. There has been a significant increase in the number of viewers on the Wikipedia pages of Hmar, Thadou, Kuki, Paite, and Vaiphei since the outbreak of violence on 2 May 2023.
• "Russia fines Wikipedia owner for failing to delete Azov battalion content - Ifax". Reuters. June 6, 2023. Retrieved June 7, 2023. Wikipedia is one of the few surviving independent sources of information in Russia since a state crackdown on online content intensified after Moscow sent its armed forces into Ukraine.
• Klein, Shira (June 14, 2023). "The shocking truth about Wikipedia's Holocaust disinformation". The Forward. Retrieved June 16, 2023. In theory, anyone can edit Wikipedia; no editor has any ownership over any article. Yet over the years, anyone who tried to fix distortions related to Holocaust disinformation faced a team of fierce editors who guard old lies and produce new ones.
• Smith, Kellie (June 15, 2023). "How to write a Wikipedia page for your charity". Charity Digital. Retrieved June 28, 2023. But creating a Wikipedia page isn't easy. This article explains the strict review process and guides you through the different steps to take to hopefully get your page approved. It's also important to be aware that anyone can add information to and edit Wikipedia pages. This means you would need to regularly monitor your page to make sure its accurate, which can prove time-consuming.
• Fatima, Zoha (June 16, 2023). "People are charmed to learn that Wikipedia editors hang out in a public library once a month". Upworthy. Retrieved June 16, 2023. Viewers were blown away by how wholesome and nice it is that Wikipedia editors have a place to gather every month. They might even receive a few more volunteers to join the meeting.
• Radhakrishnan, Vignesh (June 23, 2023). "Data Among languages mostly confined to a State, Tamil leads with 1.5 lakh Wikipedia articles". The Hindu. Retrieved June 23, 2023. Interestingly, Cebuano, a regional language spoken widely in the Philippines, has the second-highest number of articles in Wikipedia (61,23,197). The Cebuano entries are written in Latin alphabets. However, news reports show that many entries were made in Cebuano by a bot.
• Washington, Robin (June 29, 2023). "To fix Wikipedia's Holocaust denial, we must start by naming names". The Forward. Retrieved July 4, 2023. "Academia must also play its part to keep Wikipedia accurate," Klein continues. "Scholars should uncover Wikipedia's weaknesses and flag them for editors to fix, instead of snubbing Wikipedia as unreliable." While I absolutely understand Holocaust denial as something to be constantly combated, I respectfully disagree. By participating in Wikipedia's laborious processes of review, academics give legitimacy to an inherently flawed enterprise.
• Andaloro, Angelo (June 30, 2023). "20 Wikipedia Pages That Will Absolutely Suck You In For Hours". BuzzFeed. Retrieved July 4, 2023. But today I'm here to talk about Wikipedia, the best rabbit hole in existence. Here are some Wiki pages I bet you're gonna lose some hours to:

July

• Parker, Fiona (July 3, 2023). "Bestselling author Kate Mosse urges budding historians and writers to add more biographies of women to Wikipedia". Daily Mail. Retrieved July 4, 2023. The British novelist claimed that less than a fifth of all biographies on the online encyclopaedia are currently about women.
• Llewelyn, Abbie (July 6, 2023). "Wikipedia could shut down in UK after online safety law passes, Government told". The Independent. Retrieved July 7, 2023. The Liberal Democrat peer said: "There is a material risk that, without further amendment or clarification, then Wikipedia and other similar services may feel they can no longer operate in the United Kingdom."
• "Wikipedia could stop being accessible in the UK due to Online Safety Law". Engineering & Technology. July 7, 2023. Retrieved July 7, 2023. The government has been warned that the requirements of the new bill regulating the online world could lead to users losing access to Wikipedia. This is due to fears that the law could lead to "age-gating" the website, which currently does not require age verification.
• Corfield, Gareth (July 12, 2023). "Russia launches Wikipedia rival in new censorship crackdown". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved July 23, 2023. Vladimir Medeyko, the long-serving leader of Wikipedia editors in the country, has copied the website's existing 1.9 million Russian articles into a new Kremlin-approved version. The creation of the new service, called Ruwiki, was announced by a State Duma deputy from Putin's political party.
• Das, Mehul Reuben (July 13, 2023). "Russia to launch their own Wikipedia clone that will be friendlier to Putin following Wagner mutiny". Firstpost. Retrieved July 22, 2023. Despite the Kremlin's efforts to control information, Wikipedia remains one of the most popular websites in Russia. It attracts about 95 million visitors each month and has around 10,000 active editors who maintain almost 2 million articles in Russian.
• "The battle for online information: Russian Wikipedia faces threat as Putin-friendly rival Ruwiki emerges". Asianet News Network. July 13, 2023. Retrieved July 22, 2023. Although Wikipedia has continued to operate in Russia, there are indications that the tide may be turning against it. According to the Wikimedia Foundation Inc., a San Francisco-based organisation that hosts the servers that run Russian Wikipedia and is therefore legally responsible for what is published, the government repeatedly fined the website from March 2022 through this June, totaling nearly 23 billion rubles ($255 million).
• Jankowicz, Mia (July 13, 2023). "Russia has launched its own version of Wikipedia, called Ruwiki, which is notably more sympathetic to Putin". Insider. Retrieved July 23, 2023. In June last year, Wikipedia refused a Russian court's demands to remove articles about the invasion of Ukraine, and it has been fined by the Russian state several times since.
• Gertner, Jon (July 18, 2023). "Wikipedia's moment of truth". The New York Times. Retrieved July 18, 2023. ...as bots like ChatGPT become increasingly popular and sophisticated, ... what will happen if Wikipedia, outflanked by A.I. that has cannibalized it, suffers from disuse and dereliction[?] ... A computer intelligence — it might not need to be as good as Wikipedia, merely good enough — is plugged into the web and seizes the opportunity to summarize source materials and news articles instantly, the way humans now do with argument and deliberation.
• Lorenz, Taylor (July 20, 2023). "Google it? People now are searching with TikTok or Reddit". Washington Post. Retrieved July 24, 2023. Annie Rauwerda, a content creator and founder of Depths of Wikipedia, an Instagram page that surfaces the most obscure facts and posts from the service, said that Wikipedia fulfills a lot of the function that Google initially promised. "Wikipedia is constantly updated, there's standards for the sources, so it's very rare that you find low quality SEO farm websites cited," she said. Googling, she added, "should be so simple, but it was absolutely annihilated by SEO and random AI written stuff."
• Benjakob, Omer (July 18, 2023). "Conservative Israeli Think Tank Uses "Sock Puppets" to Skew Wikipedia". Haaretz. Retrieved July 23, 2023. But over the weekend it was revealed that a Kohelet researcher operated at least five fake accounts on Hebrew Wikipedia to covertly influence the open encyclopedia.
• Amdur, Eli (July 23, 2023). "Will Your Kids Be Using Wikipedia In Ten Years?". Forbes. Retrieved July 24, 2023. Well, here we are. EB is gone, Encarta is gone, and Wikipedia is one of the ten most visited sites in the world, its contributors making a half million edits per day.
• Geller, Lena; Billman, Jeffrey (July 24, 2023). "Durham Officials Directed City Attorney to Try to Unmask Anonymous Wikipedia Editors". Indy Week. Retrieved July 24, 2023. On Wikipedia, the allegations and shouting match are summarized without any apparent factual error and with links to news articles as references. But Rehberg wrote in the letter that Holsey-Hyman 'contends that the allegations are fabricated' and thus seeks to obtain the identity of [a user] who created Holsey-Hyman's page and wrote much of its content.

See also

• WP:Wikipedia in blogs
• WP:Wikipedia on TV and radio
• WP:Press coverage of health information
• Category:Wikipedia beat reporters