Changes
m
+the
{{short description|Act of editing Wikipedia in a malicious manner}}
{{selfref|This is an article about vandalism on Wikipedia. For the Wikipedia policy on vandalism, see [[Wikipedia:Vandalism]], or to report repeated cases of vandalism, see [[Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism]].}}
{{pp-move-indef|small=yes}}
{{pp-semi-indef|small=yes}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=August 2017}}
{{multiple image
| align=right
| direction=vertical
| width=330
| image1=Wikipedia vandalism.svg
| image2=Vandalized Wikipedia article.png
| footer=[[Vandalism]] of a Wikipedia article ([[Sponge]]). The top image shows a comparison between the vandalized version of the article (right) and the non-vandalized version (left). The bottom image shows the article as it appeared while vandalized, with the text added by the vandal highlighted in blue.
}}
On [[Wikipedia]], '''vandalism''' is the act of editing the project in a malicious manner that is [[WP:Disruptive editing|intentionally disruptive]]. Vandalism includes the addition, removal, or modification of the text or other material that is either humorous, nonsensical, a [[Reliability of Wikipedia|hoax]], or that is an offensive, humiliating, or otherwise degrading nature.
Throughout its history, Wikipedia has struggled to maintain a balance between allowing the freedom of open editing and protecting the accuracy of its information when false information can be potentially damaging to its subjects.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.csmonitor.com/Innovation/2009/0825/wikipedia-testing-new-method-to-curb-false-info |title=Wikipedia testing new method to curb false info |publisher=CSMonitor.com |accessdate=7 June 2012}}</ref> Vandalism is easy to commit on Wikipedia because anyone can edit the site,<ref name=newscientist/><ref name=BBC>{{cite news| url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4502846.stm | work=BBC News | title=Wikipedia tightens online rules | date=6 December 2005}}</ref> with the exception of [[:Category:Wikipedia semi-protected pages|articles that are currently semi-protected]], which means that new and unregistered users cannot edit them.
Vandalism can be committed by either guest editors or those with registered accounts; however, a semi-protected or protected page can only be edited by autoconfirmed or confirmed Wikipedia editors, or administrators, respectively.<ref name=BBC /> Frequent targets of vandalism include articles on hot and controversial topics, famous celebrities, and current events.<ref name=Newzealand>{{cite news|url=http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10432042|title=Wikipedia fights vandalism|newspaper=New Zealand Herald|last=Kleeman|first=Jenny|date=2 April 2007}}</ref><ref>{{cite news| url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2006/jun/18/wikipedia.news | location=London | work=The Guardian | first=Lorna | last=Martin | title=Wikipedia fights off cyber vandals | date=18 June 2006}}</ref> In some cases, people have been falsely reported as having died. This has notably occurred to United States Senators [[Ted Kennedy]] and [[Robert Byrd]] (both of whom are now deceased), and American rapper [[Kanye West]] (who is alive).<ref name="ABC_AU_275942">{{cite news |url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-01-28/vandals-prompt-wikipedia-to-ponder-editing-changes/275942?section=world |title=Vandals prompt Wikipedia to ponder editing changes |date=28 January 2009 |work=[[ABC News (Australia)|ABC News]] |accessdate=26 November 2011}}</ref>
The challenge from vandalism in Wikipedia was once characterized by the Former ''Encyclopædia Britannica'' editor-in-chief [[Robert McHenry]]:<ref name="caslon analytics wiki and wikipedia 1">{{cite web|url=http://www.caslon.com.au/wikiprofile1.htm|title=Caslon Analytics: wiki and wikipedia|publisher=Caslon Analytics|archiveurl=https://archive.is/20120722073818/http://www.caslon.com.au/wikiprofile1.htm|archivedate=22 July 2012|accessdate=13 July 2010}}</ref><ref name="tcsdaily faith-based encyclopedia 1">{{cite web|url=http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=111504A|title=The Faith-Based Encyclopedia|publisher=[[TCS Daily]]|author=Robert McHenry|date=15 November 2004|accessdate=10 September 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060719003313/http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=111504A|archive-date=19 July 2006|dead-url=yes|df=dmy-all}}</ref> "The user who visits Wikipedia ... is rather in the position of a visitor to a public restroom. It may be obviously dirty so that he knows to exercise great care, or it may seem fairly clean, so that he may be lulled into a false sense of security. What he certainly does not know is who has used the facilities before him."
== Fighting vandalism ==
{{multiple image
| align = right
| direction = horizontal
| image1 = Padlock-silver.svg
| width1 = 100
| image2 = Padlock-olive.svg
| width2 = 100
| image3 = Padlock.svg
| width3 = 100
| footer = [[Padlocks]] of different colors are placed on top right of pages to indicate levels of protection. Padlocks shown from left to right: [[WP:SEMI|semi-protection]], [[WP:MOVP|move protection]], and [[WP:FULL|full protection]].
}}
There are various measures taken by Wikipedia to prevent or reduce the amount of vandalism. These include:
* Using Wikipedia's history functionality, which retains all prior versions of an article, restoring the article to the last version before the vandalism occurred; this is called ''reverting'' vandalism.<ref name="Newzealand" /> The majority of vandalism on Wikipedia is reverted quickly.<ref>{{cite web|last=Hicks|first=Jesse|title=This machine kills trolls|url=https://www.theverge.com/2014/2/18/5412636/this-machine-kills-trolls-how-wikipedia-robots-snuff-out-vandalism|work=[[The Verge]]|accessdate=18 February 2014}}</ref> There are various ways in which the vandalism gets detected so it can be reverted:
**'''Bots''': In many cases, the vandalism is automatically detected and reverted by a [[internet bot|bot]]. The vandal is always warned with no human intervention.
** '''Recent changes patrol''': Wikipedia has a special page that lists all the most recent changes. Some editors will monitor these changes for possible vandalism.<ref name="Broughton122">{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=h37N0BvkVSUC&pg=PA122#v=onepage|title=Wikipedia: the missing manual|last=Broughton|first=John|publisher=|year=2008|isbn=0-596-51516-2|location=|page=122|pages=}}</ref>
** '''Watchlists''': Any registered user can watch a page that they have created or edited or that they otherwise have an interest in. This functionality also enables users to monitor a page for vandalism.<ref name="Broughton122" />
** '''Incidental discovery''': Any reader who comes across vandalism by chance can revert it. In 2008 it was reported that the rarity of such incidental discovery indicated the efficacy of the other methods of vandalism removal.<ref name="Broughton122" />
* Locking articles so only established users, or in some cases, only administrators can edit them.<ref name="Newzealand" /> ''Semi-protected'' articles are those that can only be edited by those with an account that is considered to be ''autoconfirmed'' – an account that is at least 4 days old with at least 10 edits, for most accounts. ''Fully protected articles'' are those that can only be edited by administrators. Protection is generally instituted after one or more editors makes a request on a special page for that purpose, and an administrator familiar with the protection guidelines chooses whether or not to fulfill this request based on the guidelines.
* Blocking and banning those who have repeatedly committed acts of vandalism from editing for a period of time or in some cases, indefinitely.<ref name="Newzealand" /> Vandals are not blocked as an act of punishment – the purpose of the block is simply to [[preventive action|prevent]] further damage.<ref name="Broughton134">{{cite book |title=Wikipedia: the missing manual |last=Broughton|first=John |year=2008 |isbn=0-596-51516-2 |page=134 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=h37N0BvkVSUC&pg=PA182&dq=%22edit+war%22wikipedia#v=onepage&q=%22edit%20war%22wikipedia&f=false}}</ref>
* The "abuse filter" extension, which uses [[regular expressions]] to detect common vandalism terms.<ref>See [[Wikipedia:Edit filter]]</ref>
Editors are generally warned prior to being blocked. Wikipedia employs a 4-stage warning process up to a block. This includes:<ref name="Broughton130">{{cite book |title=Wikipedia: the missing manual |last=Broughton |first=John |year=2008 |isbn=0-596-51516-2 |pages=130–31 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=h37N0BvkVSUC&pg=PA182&dq=%22edit+war%22wikipedia#v=onepage&q=%22edit%20war%22wikipedia&f=false}}</ref>
#The first warning [[Wikipedia:Assume good faith|assumes good faith]] and takes a relaxed approach to the user. (in some cases, this level can be skipped if the editor assumes the user is acting in bad faith<ref>See {{slink|Wikipedia:WikiProject User warnings/Usage and layout|Levels}}</ref>).
#The second warning does not assume any faith and is an actual warning (in some cases, this level may also be skipped).
#The third warning [[Wikipedia:Assume bad faith|assumes bad faith]] and is the first to warn the user that continued vandalism may result in a [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|block]].
#The fourth warning is a final warning, stating that any future acts of vandalism will result in a block.
#After this, other users may place additional warnings, though only administrators can actually carry out the block.
In 2005, the [[English Wikipedia]] started to require those who create new articles to have a registered account in an effort to fight vandalism. This occurred after inaccurate information was added to Wikipedia in which a journalist was accused of taking part in Kennedy's assassination.<ref name="newscientist">{{cite web|url=https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn8425-wikipedia-tightens-editorial-rules-after-complaint.html |title=Wikipedia tightens editorial rules after complaint – 06 December 2005 |publisher=New Scientist |accessdate=7 June 2012}}</ref>
Wikipedia has experimented with systems in which edits to some articles, especially those of living people, are delayed until it can be reviewed and determined that they are not vandalism, and in some cases, that a source to verify accuracy is provided. This is in an effort to prevent inaccurate and potentially damaging information about living people from appearing on the site.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/wikipedia_tests_approval_system_reduce_page_vandalism |title=Wikipedia Tests Approval System to Reduce Page Vandalism |publisher=Maximum PC |date=19 July 2008 |accessdate=7 June 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://news.ebrandz.com/miscellaneous/2009/2824-wikipedia-plans-to-enforce-new-editing-policy-to-thwart-vandals-.html |title=Wikipedia plans to enforce new editing policy to thwart vandals – eBrandz Search Marketing & Technology News |publisher=News.ebrandz.com |date=27 August 2009 |accessdate=7 June 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120621061552/http://news.ebrandz.com/miscellaneous/2009/2824-wikipedia-plans-to-enforce-new-editing-policy-to-thwart-vandals-.html |archive-date=21 June 2012 |dead-url=yes |df=dmy-all }}</ref>
[[File:Screen capture of the AIV page on the English Wikipedia.png|thumb|1000px|center|Screenshot of the [[Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism|vandalism-reports-page]] on the [[English Wikipedia]] as of December 2013.]]
=== ClueBot NG ===
The most famous "bot" that fights vandalism is [[User:ClueBot NG|ClueBot NG]]. The bot was created by Wikipedia users Christopher Breneman and Cobi Carter in 2010, (succeeding the original ClueBot, NG stands for Next Generation)<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.theverge.com/2014/2/18/5412636/this-machine-kills-trolls-how-wikipedia-robots-snuff-out-vandalism|title=This machine kills trolls|date=18 February 2014|website=The Verge|access-date=11 April 2017}}</ref> and uses [[machine learning]] and [[Bayesian statistics]] to determine if an edit is vandalism.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-18892510|title=Meet the 'bots' that edit Wikipedia|last=Nasaw|first=Daniel|date=25 July 2012|website=BBC News}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://digitfreak.com/technology/digital/1374-little-about-the-bot-that-runs-wikipedia,-cluebot-ng|title=Little about the bot that runs Wikipedia, ClueBot NG|last=Raja|first=Sumit|website=digitfreak.com|accessdate=11 April 2017}}</ref>
While the bot has been effective in helping keep Wikipedia clean, some claim the bot "[[WP:BITE|bites]]" new users by not being able to apply a human brain's knowledge to the edit, and leaving impersonal [[WP:TEMPLATES|templates]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.quora.com/How-does-Wikipedias-content-review-bot-ClueBot-NG-review-Wikipedia-pages-and-validate-their-facts|title=How does Wikipedia's content review bot ClueBot NG review Wikipedia pages and validate their facts? – Quora|website=www.quora.com|access-date=11 April 2017}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/bots-edit-wikipedia-humans-made/|title=The Bots Who Edit Wikipedia (And The Humans Who Made Them)|work=MakeUseOf|access-date=11 April 2017}}</ref>
=== Blacklisting ===
The MediaWiki title blacklist extension prevents page move vandalism and creation vandalism by using [[regular expressions]] to identify bad titles. Titles on the blacklist can only be created by or moved to by administrators. Pages that are also created repeatedly can be protected to prevent vandals from recreating bad pages.
In addition to the Title Blacklist, the spam blacklist prevents external link [[spamming]], a form of vandalism. New/unregistered users who want to add external links are required to answer a [[CAPTCHA]].
The bad image list prevents images that are commonly used to vandalize pages from being inserted, such as images with sexual content.
The entirety of the MediaWiki namespace, the main page, and high risk templates are protected to prevent high server load and sudden interface changes.
The edit filter can also prevent vandalism by disallowing the bad edit altogether.
== Notable acts of vandalism ==
=== Seigenthaler incident ===
{{main|Wikipedia Seigenthaler biography incident}}
[[File:John Seigenthaler Sr. speaking.jpg|thumb|alt=White-haired elderly gentleman in suit and tie speaks at a podium.|[[John Seigenthaler]], who in 2005 criticized Wikipedia]]
In May 2005, a user edited the [[biography|biographical]] article about [[John Seigenthaler, Sr.]] so that it contained several false and [[defamation|defamatory]] statements.<ref name=SeigenthalerUSAToday>{{cite news|url=https://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2005-11-29-wikipedia-edit_x.htm|work=USA Today|date=29 November 2005|title=A false Wikipedia "biography"|author=[[John Seigenthaler]]}}</ref> The inaccurate claims went unnoticed between May and September 2005, when they were discovered by [[Victor S. Johnson, Jr.]], a friend of Seigenthaler. Wikipedia content is often mirrored at sites such as [[Answers.com]], which means that incorrect information can be replicated alongside correct information through a number of websites. Such information can develop a misleading air of authority because of its presence at such sites:<ref name=SeigenthalerABC>{{cite web|url=http://www.abc.net.au/rn/science/ss/stories/s1613571.htm|title=Mistakes and hoaxes on-line|publisher=Australian Broadcasting Corporation| date=15 April 2006| accessdate=28 April 2007}}</ref>
{{quote|
Then [Seigenthaler's] son discovered that his father's hoax biography also appeared on two other sites, Reference.com and Answers.com, which took direct feeds from Wikipedia. It was out there for four months before Seigenthaler realized and got the Wikipedia entry replaced with a more reliable account. The lies remained for another three weeks on the mirror sites downstream.
}}
=== Stephen Colbert ===
{{See also|Cultural impact of The Colbert Report#Wikipedia references|label 1=Wikipedia references on The Colbert Report}}
Comedian [[Stephen Colbert]] made repeated references to Wikipedia on his TV show ''[[The Colbert Report]]'', frequently suggesting on air that his viewers vandalize selected pages. These instances include the following:
* On a 2006 episode of his show, Colbert suggested viewers vandalize the article "[[Elephant]]". This resulted in an account named "[[User:Stephencolbert|Stephencolbert]]" being blocked from editing, as well as many elephant-related articles being protected.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.tvsquad.com/2006/08/01/did-colbert-hack-wikipedia-video/ |title=Did Colbert hack Wikipedia? – VIDEO |publisher=Tvsquad.com |accessdate=7 June 2012 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20110119215141/http://www.tvsquad.com/2006/08/01/did-colbert-hack-wikipedia-video/ |archivedate=19 January 2011 }}</ref>
* On 7 August 2012, Colbert suggested that his viewers go to pages for possible 2012 U.S. Republican vice presidential candidates, such as the [[Tim Pawlenty]] and [[Rob Portman]] articles, and edit them many times. This was in response to a [[Fox News Channel|Fox News]] hypothesis that mass editing of the [[Sarah Palin]] page the day before she was announced as [[John McCain]]'s running mate could help predict who would be chosen as [[Mitt Romney]]'s running mate in the [[United States presidential election, 2012|2012 election]]. After Colbert's request and his viewers' subsequent actions, all these articles were put under {{srlink|Wikipedia:Protection policy#Semi-protection|semi-protection}} by Wikipedia administrators, with editing restricted to established users.<ref>{{cite web | title=Stephen Colbert's Wikipedia Vice Presidential Scheme Short Circuited | url=http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/stephen-colberts-wikipedia-vice-presidential-359985 | work=The Hollywood Reporter | date=8 August 2012 | accessdate=8 August 2012}}</ref>
When Wikipedia co-founder [[Jimmy Wales]] appeared as a guest on 24 May 2007 episode of ''The Colbert Report'', they discussed Colbert-related vandalism. Wales later said on the show that he may have to lock down the entire [[Spanish Wikipedia|Spanish-language Wikipedia]] for a few days after Colbert commented that perhaps it should learn English.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.comedycentral.com/colbertreport/videos.jhtml?videoId=87528|title=Jimmy Wales|publisher=[[Comedy Central]]|date=24 May 2007 |accessdate=2 September 2008 |archiveurl = https://web.archive.org/web/20080510170626/http://www.comedycentral.com/colbertreport/videos.jhtml?videoId=87528 |archivedate = 10 May 2008}}</ref>
=== Hillsborough disaster vandalism ===
{{Main|Hillsborough Wikipedia posts}}
In April 2014, the ''[[Liverpool Echo]]'' reported that computers on an intranet used by the [[Government of the United Kingdom|United Kingdom government]] had been used to post offensive remarks about the [[Hillsborough disaster]] on Wikipedia pages relating to the subject. The government announced that it would launch an inquiry into the reports.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-27165844 |work=BBC News |title=Hillsborough Wikipedia posts were 'sickening', Cabinet Office says |publisher=BBC |date=25 April 2014 |accessdate=25 April 2014}}</ref> Following the allegations, ''[[The Daily Telegraph]]'' reported that government computers appeared to have been used to vandalize a number of other articles, often adding insulting remarks to biographical articles, and in one case falsely reporting a death.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wikipedia/10791202/Des-Lynam-killed-by-a-giant-snowball-and-other-embarrassing-Wikipedia-edits-from-Whitehall-computers.html |title=Des Lynam 'killed by a giant snowball' and other embarrassing Wikipedia edits from Whitehall computers |first=Oliver |last=Duggan |newspaper=The Daily Telegraph |publisher=Telegraph Media Group |date=27 April 2014 |accessdate=4 May 2014}}</ref>
=== Other notable acts of vandalism ===
{{importance section|date=October 2016}}
* A vandal called Willy on Wheels renamed thousands of articles so that their titles ended with "on wheels".<ref>{{cite news|last1=Dee|first1=Jonathan|title=Wikipedia - Computers and the Internet - Encyclopedias - News and News Media|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/01/magazine/01WIKIPEDIA-t.html|accessdate=26 May 2018|work=New York Times|date=1 July 2007}}</ref>
* In 2006, ''[[Rolling Stone]]'' printed a story about [[Halle Berry]] based on false information from Wikipedia, which had arisen from an act of Wikipedia vandalism.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Rolling_Stone_prints_story_based_on_Wikipedia_vandalism |title=Rolling Stone prints story based on Wikipedia vandalism – Wikinews, the free news source |publisher=En.wikinews.org |accessdate=7 June 2012}}</ref>
* In August 2007, local media from the Netherlands reported that several IP addresses from [[Nederlandse Publieke Omroep (organization)|Nederlandse Publieke Omroep]] had been blocked from Wikipedia for adding "false and defamatory" information to pages.<ref>{{cite news|title=Wikipedia blokkeert medewerkers publieke omroep|url=http://www.volkskrant.nl/recensies/wikipedia-blokkeert-medewerkers-publieke-omroep~a873862/|website=De Volkskrant|accessdate=3 April 2017|language=Dutch|date=30 August 2007}}</ref> A similar incident occurred with the [[Minister of the Interior (France)|Minister of the Interior]] in France in January 2016.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Tual|first1=Morgane|title=Une adresse IP du ministère de l’intérieur bloquée sur Wikipédia pour « vandalisme »|url=http://www.lemonde.fr/pixels/article/2016/01/13/une-adresse-ip-du-ministere-de-l-interieur-bloquee-sur-wikipedia-pour-vandalisme_4846544_4408996.html|website=LeMonde.fr|accessdate=3 April 2017|language=French|date=13 January 2016}}</ref>
* Professional golfer [[Fuzzy Zoeller]] sued a Miami company whose IP-based edits to the Wikipedia site included negative information about him.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.tomshardware.com/news/golfer-sues-wikipedia-vandalism,4377.html|title=Pro golfer sues over Wikipedia vandalism|last=Cheung|first=Humphrey|date=26 February 2007|publisher=Tom's Hardware}}</ref>
* In May 2012, media critic [[Anita Sarkeesian]] created a [[Kickstarter]] project, intending to raise money to make a series of videos exploring sexism in digital gaming culture.<ref>{{cite book|author=Carlen Lavigne|title=Cyberpunk Women, Feminism and Science Fiction: A Critical Study|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1gOPZ_AQl5gC&pg=PA184|accessdate=20 April 2013|date=24 January 2013|publisher=McFarland|isbn=978-0-7864-6653-5|page=184}}</ref> The idea evoked a hostile response,<ref name=dearinternet>{{cite news|url=http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/internet/2012/06/dear-internet-why-you-cant-have-anything-nice|publisher=New Statesman|title=Dear The Internet, This Is Why You Can't Have Anything Nice|author=Helen Lewis|date=12 June 2012|accessdate=20 April 2013}}</ref> which included repeated vandalism of Sarkeesian's Wikipedia article with pornographic imagery, defamatory statements, and threats of sexual violence.<ref name="Weckerle2013">{{cite book|author=Andrea Weckerle|title=Civility in the Digital Age: How Companies and People Can Triumph over Haters, Trolls, Bullies and Other Jerks|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=64P3Y_c-ufEC&pg=PT33|accessdate=20 April 2013|date=13 February 2013|publisher=Que Publishing|isbn=978-0-13-313498-8|page=33}}</ref> More than 12 anonymous editors contributed to the ongoing vandalism campaign before editing privileges were revoked for the page.<ref name=dearinternet/>
* In November 2012, the [[Leveson Inquiry|Leveson report]]—published in the [[United Kingdom|UK]] by [[Brian Leveson|Lord Justice Leveson]]—incorrectly listed a "Brett Straub" as one of the founders of ''[[The Independent]]'' newspaper. The name originated from one of the several erroneous edits by one of Straub's friends as a prank to Wikipedia by falsely including his name in several articles across the site. The name's inclusion in the report suggested that that part of the report relating to that newspaper had been cut and pasted from Wikipedia without a proper check of the sources.<ref name="Straub incident">{{cite news|last=Allen|first=Nick|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/leveson-inquiry/9723296/Wikipedia-the-25-year-old-student-and-the-prank-that-fooled-Leveson.html|title=Wikipedia, the 25-year–old student and the prank that fooled Leveson|publisher=Telegraph Media Group|newspaper=The Daily Telegraph|date=5 December 2012|accessdate=8 December 2012}}</ref><ref name="Straub in Independent">{{cite news|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/press/levesons-wikipedia-moment-how-internet-research-on-the-independents-history-left-him-redfaced-8372446.html|title=Leveson's Wikipedia moment: how internet 'research' on The Independent's history left him red-faced|author=Andy McSmith|work=The Independent|date=30 November 2012}}</ref> The Straub issue was also humorously referenced in broadcasts of BBC entertainment [[current affairs (news format)|current affairs]] TV program ''[[Have I Got News for You]]'' (and extended edition ''Have I Got a Bit More News for You''),<ref name="Straub BBC">{{cite web|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01p8g6s/Have_I_Got_News_for_You_Series_44_Episode_8|title=Have I Got News for You (series 44, episode 8) TV programme|date=7 December 2012 |publisher=BBC|accessdate=12 December 2012}}</ref><ref name="Straub HIGNFY">{{cite web|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1p6qSt0VbA|title=Have I Got News for You: Series 44, Episode 8 (Leveson clip)|date=7 December 2012|publisher=BBC|accessdate=12 December 2012}}</ref> with ''[[The Economist]]'' also making passing comment on the issue: "The Leveson report...Parts of it are a scissors-and-paste job culled from Wikipedia".<ref>{{cite news|title=Hacked to pieces|url=https://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21567944-somewhat-mediocre-report-could-yet-lead-better-press-rules-britain-hacked-pieces|newspaper=The Economist|date=8 December 2012|accessdate=8 December 2012}}</ref>
* In April 2015, ''The [[Washington Post]]'' reported on an experiment by "Gregory Kohs, a former editor, and prominent Wikipedia critic": "Kohs wrapped up an experiment in which he inserted outlandish errors into 31 articles and tracked whether editors ever found them. After more than two months, half of his hoaxes still had not been found—and those included errors on high-profile pages, like "Mediterranean climate" and "inflammation." (By his estimate, more than 100,000 people have now seen the claim that volcanic rock produced by the human body causes inflammation pain.)"<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/04/15/the-great-wikipedia-hoax/ | title=The story behind Jar’Edo Wens, the longest-running hoax in Wikipedia history | date=15 April 2015 | accessdate=19 October 2016 | author=Caitlin Dewey | work=The Washington Post}}</ref>
[[File:Wikipedia_vandalism_-_history_around_revision_672598769.png|thumb|right|The article for [[Donald Trump]] was blanked twice on 22 July 2015.]]
* In July 2015, [[Donald Trump]]'s entire Wikipedia page was replaced with one sentence critical of him.<ref>Ben Popper (22 July 2015). [https://www.theverge.com/2015/7/22/9014525/someone-just-deleted-donald-trumps-entire-wikipedia-page "Someone just deleted Donald Trump's entire Wikipedia page"]. ''The Verge'' (Vox Media).</ref><ref>[http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/donald-trump-wikipedia-deleted "All The Content On Donald Trump's Wikipedia Page Was Just Deleted"]. ''TPM''.</ref><ref>Andrea Peterson (22 July 2015). [https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2015/07/22/donald-trumps-wikipedia-page-was-deleted-today-twice/ "Donald Trump’s Wikipedia page was deleted today. Twice."]. ''Washington Post''.</ref>
* In August 2016, a sentence was added to [[Chad le Clos]]'s Wikipedia page says that he "Died at the hands of [[Michael Phelps]], being literally blown out of the water by the greatest American since Abraham Lincoln" after Phelps won the gold medal for 200-meter butterfly at the [[2016 Summer Olympics]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/08/chad-le-clos-michael-phelps-olympic-games-rio-2016-gold-medal-race-highlights-video|title=Somebody trolled Chad Le Clos with the greatest Wikipedia page edit ever|date=10 August 2016|language=en-US|access-date=12 August 2016}}</ref> This instance of Wikipedia vandalism attracted moderate media attention.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/national-international/Chad-Le-Clos-Wikipedia-Page-Edits-Says-Hes-Dead-Due-to-Phelps-Hands-389730721.html|title=Chad le Clos' Wikipedia Page Edited to Say Phelps Killed Him|access-date=12 August 2016}}</ref>
* In October 2016, both [[Hillary Clinton|Hillary]] and [[Bill Clinton]]'s Wikipedia pages were vandalized and pornographic images added to their articles. This was done by a member of the [[Gay Nigger Association of America]], an Internet trolling group.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://theslot.jezebel.com/hillary-and-bill-clintons-wikipedia-pages-subject-to-ex-1787755920|title=Internet Trolls Vandalize Hillary and Bill Clinton's Wikipedia Pages in Extremely NSFW Way|last=O'Connor|first=Brendan|date=October 13, 2016|access-date=October 13, 2016}}</ref>
* In October 2016 New York Assembly candidate [[Jim Tedisco]]'s Wikipedia page was modified to say that he had "never been part of the majority", and "is considered by many to be a total failure". Tedisco expressed dismay at the changes to his page.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.saratogian.com/general-news/20161022/assemblyman-tediscos-wikipedia-page-vandalized|title=Assemblyman Tedisco's Wikipedia vandalized|last=|first=|date=|website=|publisher=|access-date=}}</ref>
* The week of 29 January 2017 saw various acts of vandalism committed on Wikipedia. White House Press Secretary [[Sean Spicer|Sean Spicer's]] Wikipedia page was vandalized and his picture replaced with that of [[Baghdad Bob]], [[Dana J. Boente]]'s page description was edited to read that he was "the newest sock puppet for the Trump Administration", and [[Paul Ryan|Paul Ryan's]] picture was added to a list of [[invertebrate]]s, with the edit summary stating that he was added due to his lack of a spine. These cases of vandalism attracted media attention.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://nymag.com/selectall/2017/01/funny-wikipedia-edits-about-spicer-paul-ryan-and-yates.html|title=Wikipedia Edits Are the Only Joy in These Fraught Political Times|last=Kircher|first=Madison Malone|newspaper=Select All|language=en|access-date=2 February 2017}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.chron.com/news/politics/us/article/Wikipedia-briefly-listed-politicians-and-other-10891261.php|title=Wikipedia briefly listed politicians and other invertebrates|newspaper=Houston Chronicle|access-date=2 February 2017}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.bostonglobe.com/arts/2017/01/31/from-strange-specimen-paul-ryan-uber-big-dropoff/vmUp4KMqD9wZ0Sq4utDK5I/story.html|title=From the strange specimen of Paul Ryan to Uber’s big dropoff – The Boston Globe|newspaper=BostonGlobe.com|access-date=2 February 2017}}</ref>
* On July 24, 2018, [[Utah]] [[US Senate|senator]] [[Orrin Hatch]] posted humorous [[Twitter|tweet]]s after [[Google]] claimed that he had died on September 11, 2017.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Ehrlich |first1=Jamie |title=GOP senator says he is alive amid Google searches suggesting he is dead |url=https://edition.cnn.com/2018/07/24/politics/orrin-hatch-alive-google-search-dead/index.html |website=[[CNN]] |accessdate=September 11, 2018 |date=July 24, 2018}}</ref> The cause of the error was later revealed to be vandalism on Wikipedia inserting that as Hatch's death date.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Horton |first1=Alex |title=Is Orrin Hatch dead? Let me Google that for you. |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2018/07/24/is-orrin-hatch-dead-let-me-google-that-for-you/ |website=Washington Post |accessdate=September 11, 2018 |date=July 24, 2018}}</ref><ref>[[All Things Considered]] (July 24, 2018), from [[National Public Radio]].</ref><ref>The actual edit was here: {{cite web |author1=Wikipedia contributors |authorlink1=Wikipedians |title=Orrin Hatch: Difference between revisions |url=https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Orrin_Hatch&type=revision&diff=851804083&oldid=851803618 |website=Wikipedia |publisher=Wikimedia Foundation |accessdate=24 July 2018}}</ref>
* On September 27, 2018, the personal information of United States senators [[Lindsey Graham]], [[Mike Lee (American politician)|Mike Lee]], and [[Orrin Hatch]] were added to their respective Wikipedia articles during the hearing of Supreme Court Nominee Judge [[Brett Kavanaugh]]. The information included their home addresses and phone numbers, and originated from the network located from within the [[United States House of Representatives]]. The edits were removed from Wikipedia and hidden from public view shortly afterwards.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://gizmodo.com/republican-senators-doxed-while-interviewing-kavanaugh-1829376044|publisher=[[Gizmodo]]|title=Republican Senators Doxed While Interviewing Kavanaugh|last=Cameron|first=Dell|date=September 27, 2018|accessdate=October 30, 2018}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/someone-on-capitol-hill-just-doxxed-republican-sens-mike-lee-orrin-hatch-and-lindsey-graham|publisher=[[Washington Examiner]]|title=Someone on Capitol Hill just 'doxed' Republican Sens. Mike Lee, Orrin Hatch, and Lindsey Graham|last=Wegmann|first=Philip|date=September 27, 2018|accessdate=October 30, 2018}}</ref> These edits were captured and automatically posted publicly to [[Twitter]] by an automated account. Twitter shortly removed the posts and suspended the account in response to the incident.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.foxnews.com/politics/republican-senators-doxxed-on-wikipedia-by-someone-from-house-of-representatives-after-kavanaugh-hearing|publisher=[[FOX News]]|title=Republican senators doxxed on Wikipedia by someone from House of Representatives after Kavanaugh hearing|last=Mikelionis|first=Lukas|date=September 28, 2018|accessdate=October 30, 2018}}</ref> An internal police investigation located the person who made the edits, and 27-year-old Jackson A. Cosko (a staffer for Congress paid by an outside institution) was arrested and charged with multiple felony crimes relating to the incident.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.dailywire.com/news/36826/report-dem-staffer-arrested-doxxing-republican-emily-zanotti|publisher=[[Daily Wire]]|title=REPORT: The Dem Staffer Arrested For Doxxing Republican Senators WASN'T An Intern|last=Zanotti|first=Emily|date=October 7, 2018|accessdate=October 30, 2018}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/sns-tns-bc-congress-doxxing-20181003-story.html|publisher=[[New York Daily News]]|title=Suspect in congressional doxxing cases arrested|last=Dick|first=Jason|date=October 3, 2018|accessdate=October 30, 2018}}</ref>
== See also ==
{{Portal|Internet}}
*[[Reliability of Wikipedia]]
== References ==
{{reflist|30em}}
{{Wikipedia}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Vandalism On Wikipedia}}
[[Category:Wikipedia]]
[[Category:Vandalism]]
[[Category:Wikipedia reliability]]
{{selfref|This is an article about vandalism on Wikipedia. For the Wikipedia policy on vandalism, see [[Wikipedia:Vandalism]], or to report repeated cases of vandalism, see [[Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism]].}}
{{pp-move-indef|small=yes}}
{{pp-semi-indef|small=yes}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=August 2017}}
{{multiple image
| align=right
| direction=vertical
| width=330
| image1=Wikipedia vandalism.svg
| image2=Vandalized Wikipedia article.png
| footer=[[Vandalism]] of a Wikipedia article ([[Sponge]]). The top image shows a comparison between the vandalized version of the article (right) and the non-vandalized version (left). The bottom image shows the article as it appeared while vandalized, with the text added by the vandal highlighted in blue.
}}
On [[Wikipedia]], '''vandalism''' is the act of editing the project in a malicious manner that is [[WP:Disruptive editing|intentionally disruptive]]. Vandalism includes the addition, removal, or modification of the text or other material that is either humorous, nonsensical, a [[Reliability of Wikipedia|hoax]], or that is an offensive, humiliating, or otherwise degrading nature.
Throughout its history, Wikipedia has struggled to maintain a balance between allowing the freedom of open editing and protecting the accuracy of its information when false information can be potentially damaging to its subjects.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.csmonitor.com/Innovation/2009/0825/wikipedia-testing-new-method-to-curb-false-info |title=Wikipedia testing new method to curb false info |publisher=CSMonitor.com |accessdate=7 June 2012}}</ref> Vandalism is easy to commit on Wikipedia because anyone can edit the site,<ref name=newscientist/><ref name=BBC>{{cite news| url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4502846.stm | work=BBC News | title=Wikipedia tightens online rules | date=6 December 2005}}</ref> with the exception of [[:Category:Wikipedia semi-protected pages|articles that are currently semi-protected]], which means that new and unregistered users cannot edit them.
Vandalism can be committed by either guest editors or those with registered accounts; however, a semi-protected or protected page can only be edited by autoconfirmed or confirmed Wikipedia editors, or administrators, respectively.<ref name=BBC /> Frequent targets of vandalism include articles on hot and controversial topics, famous celebrities, and current events.<ref name=Newzealand>{{cite news|url=http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10432042|title=Wikipedia fights vandalism|newspaper=New Zealand Herald|last=Kleeman|first=Jenny|date=2 April 2007}}</ref><ref>{{cite news| url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2006/jun/18/wikipedia.news | location=London | work=The Guardian | first=Lorna | last=Martin | title=Wikipedia fights off cyber vandals | date=18 June 2006}}</ref> In some cases, people have been falsely reported as having died. This has notably occurred to United States Senators [[Ted Kennedy]] and [[Robert Byrd]] (both of whom are now deceased), and American rapper [[Kanye West]] (who is alive).<ref name="ABC_AU_275942">{{cite news |url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-01-28/vandals-prompt-wikipedia-to-ponder-editing-changes/275942?section=world |title=Vandals prompt Wikipedia to ponder editing changes |date=28 January 2009 |work=[[ABC News (Australia)|ABC News]] |accessdate=26 November 2011}}</ref>
The challenge from vandalism in Wikipedia was once characterized by the Former ''Encyclopædia Britannica'' editor-in-chief [[Robert McHenry]]:<ref name="caslon analytics wiki and wikipedia 1">{{cite web|url=http://www.caslon.com.au/wikiprofile1.htm|title=Caslon Analytics: wiki and wikipedia|publisher=Caslon Analytics|archiveurl=https://archive.is/20120722073818/http://www.caslon.com.au/wikiprofile1.htm|archivedate=22 July 2012|accessdate=13 July 2010}}</ref><ref name="tcsdaily faith-based encyclopedia 1">{{cite web|url=http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=111504A|title=The Faith-Based Encyclopedia|publisher=[[TCS Daily]]|author=Robert McHenry|date=15 November 2004|accessdate=10 September 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060719003313/http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=111504A|archive-date=19 July 2006|dead-url=yes|df=dmy-all}}</ref> "The user who visits Wikipedia ... is rather in the position of a visitor to a public restroom. It may be obviously dirty so that he knows to exercise great care, or it may seem fairly clean, so that he may be lulled into a false sense of security. What he certainly does not know is who has used the facilities before him."
== Fighting vandalism ==
{{multiple image
| align = right
| direction = horizontal
| image1 = Padlock-silver.svg
| width1 = 100
| image2 = Padlock-olive.svg
| width2 = 100
| image3 = Padlock.svg
| width3 = 100
| footer = [[Padlocks]] of different colors are placed on top right of pages to indicate levels of protection. Padlocks shown from left to right: [[WP:SEMI|semi-protection]], [[WP:MOVP|move protection]], and [[WP:FULL|full protection]].
}}
There are various measures taken by Wikipedia to prevent or reduce the amount of vandalism. These include:
* Using Wikipedia's history functionality, which retains all prior versions of an article, restoring the article to the last version before the vandalism occurred; this is called ''reverting'' vandalism.<ref name="Newzealand" /> The majority of vandalism on Wikipedia is reverted quickly.<ref>{{cite web|last=Hicks|first=Jesse|title=This machine kills trolls|url=https://www.theverge.com/2014/2/18/5412636/this-machine-kills-trolls-how-wikipedia-robots-snuff-out-vandalism|work=[[The Verge]]|accessdate=18 February 2014}}</ref> There are various ways in which the vandalism gets detected so it can be reverted:
**'''Bots''': In many cases, the vandalism is automatically detected and reverted by a [[internet bot|bot]]. The vandal is always warned with no human intervention.
** '''Recent changes patrol''': Wikipedia has a special page that lists all the most recent changes. Some editors will monitor these changes for possible vandalism.<ref name="Broughton122">{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=h37N0BvkVSUC&pg=PA122#v=onepage|title=Wikipedia: the missing manual|last=Broughton|first=John|publisher=|year=2008|isbn=0-596-51516-2|location=|page=122|pages=}}</ref>
** '''Watchlists''': Any registered user can watch a page that they have created or edited or that they otherwise have an interest in. This functionality also enables users to monitor a page for vandalism.<ref name="Broughton122" />
** '''Incidental discovery''': Any reader who comes across vandalism by chance can revert it. In 2008 it was reported that the rarity of such incidental discovery indicated the efficacy of the other methods of vandalism removal.<ref name="Broughton122" />
* Locking articles so only established users, or in some cases, only administrators can edit them.<ref name="Newzealand" /> ''Semi-protected'' articles are those that can only be edited by those with an account that is considered to be ''autoconfirmed'' – an account that is at least 4 days old with at least 10 edits, for most accounts. ''Fully protected articles'' are those that can only be edited by administrators. Protection is generally instituted after one or more editors makes a request on a special page for that purpose, and an administrator familiar with the protection guidelines chooses whether or not to fulfill this request based on the guidelines.
* Blocking and banning those who have repeatedly committed acts of vandalism from editing for a period of time or in some cases, indefinitely.<ref name="Newzealand" /> Vandals are not blocked as an act of punishment – the purpose of the block is simply to [[preventive action|prevent]] further damage.<ref name="Broughton134">{{cite book |title=Wikipedia: the missing manual |last=Broughton|first=John |year=2008 |isbn=0-596-51516-2 |page=134 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=h37N0BvkVSUC&pg=PA182&dq=%22edit+war%22wikipedia#v=onepage&q=%22edit%20war%22wikipedia&f=false}}</ref>
* The "abuse filter" extension, which uses [[regular expressions]] to detect common vandalism terms.<ref>See [[Wikipedia:Edit filter]]</ref>
Editors are generally warned prior to being blocked. Wikipedia employs a 4-stage warning process up to a block. This includes:<ref name="Broughton130">{{cite book |title=Wikipedia: the missing manual |last=Broughton |first=John |year=2008 |isbn=0-596-51516-2 |pages=130–31 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=h37N0BvkVSUC&pg=PA182&dq=%22edit+war%22wikipedia#v=onepage&q=%22edit%20war%22wikipedia&f=false}}</ref>
#The first warning [[Wikipedia:Assume good faith|assumes good faith]] and takes a relaxed approach to the user. (in some cases, this level can be skipped if the editor assumes the user is acting in bad faith<ref>See {{slink|Wikipedia:WikiProject User warnings/Usage and layout|Levels}}</ref>).
#The second warning does not assume any faith and is an actual warning (in some cases, this level may also be skipped).
#The third warning [[Wikipedia:Assume bad faith|assumes bad faith]] and is the first to warn the user that continued vandalism may result in a [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|block]].
#The fourth warning is a final warning, stating that any future acts of vandalism will result in a block.
#After this, other users may place additional warnings, though only administrators can actually carry out the block.
In 2005, the [[English Wikipedia]] started to require those who create new articles to have a registered account in an effort to fight vandalism. This occurred after inaccurate information was added to Wikipedia in which a journalist was accused of taking part in Kennedy's assassination.<ref name="newscientist">{{cite web|url=https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn8425-wikipedia-tightens-editorial-rules-after-complaint.html |title=Wikipedia tightens editorial rules after complaint – 06 December 2005 |publisher=New Scientist |accessdate=7 June 2012}}</ref>
Wikipedia has experimented with systems in which edits to some articles, especially those of living people, are delayed until it can be reviewed and determined that they are not vandalism, and in some cases, that a source to verify accuracy is provided. This is in an effort to prevent inaccurate and potentially damaging information about living people from appearing on the site.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/wikipedia_tests_approval_system_reduce_page_vandalism |title=Wikipedia Tests Approval System to Reduce Page Vandalism |publisher=Maximum PC |date=19 July 2008 |accessdate=7 June 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://news.ebrandz.com/miscellaneous/2009/2824-wikipedia-plans-to-enforce-new-editing-policy-to-thwart-vandals-.html |title=Wikipedia plans to enforce new editing policy to thwart vandals – eBrandz Search Marketing & Technology News |publisher=News.ebrandz.com |date=27 August 2009 |accessdate=7 June 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120621061552/http://news.ebrandz.com/miscellaneous/2009/2824-wikipedia-plans-to-enforce-new-editing-policy-to-thwart-vandals-.html |archive-date=21 June 2012 |dead-url=yes |df=dmy-all }}</ref>
[[File:Screen capture of the AIV page on the English Wikipedia.png|thumb|1000px|center|Screenshot of the [[Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism|vandalism-reports-page]] on the [[English Wikipedia]] as of December 2013.]]
=== ClueBot NG ===
The most famous "bot" that fights vandalism is [[User:ClueBot NG|ClueBot NG]]. The bot was created by Wikipedia users Christopher Breneman and Cobi Carter in 2010, (succeeding the original ClueBot, NG stands for Next Generation)<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.theverge.com/2014/2/18/5412636/this-machine-kills-trolls-how-wikipedia-robots-snuff-out-vandalism|title=This machine kills trolls|date=18 February 2014|website=The Verge|access-date=11 April 2017}}</ref> and uses [[machine learning]] and [[Bayesian statistics]] to determine if an edit is vandalism.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-18892510|title=Meet the 'bots' that edit Wikipedia|last=Nasaw|first=Daniel|date=25 July 2012|website=BBC News}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://digitfreak.com/technology/digital/1374-little-about-the-bot-that-runs-wikipedia,-cluebot-ng|title=Little about the bot that runs Wikipedia, ClueBot NG|last=Raja|first=Sumit|website=digitfreak.com|accessdate=11 April 2017}}</ref>
While the bot has been effective in helping keep Wikipedia clean, some claim the bot "[[WP:BITE|bites]]" new users by not being able to apply a human brain's knowledge to the edit, and leaving impersonal [[WP:TEMPLATES|templates]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.quora.com/How-does-Wikipedias-content-review-bot-ClueBot-NG-review-Wikipedia-pages-and-validate-their-facts|title=How does Wikipedia's content review bot ClueBot NG review Wikipedia pages and validate their facts? – Quora|website=www.quora.com|access-date=11 April 2017}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/bots-edit-wikipedia-humans-made/|title=The Bots Who Edit Wikipedia (And The Humans Who Made Them)|work=MakeUseOf|access-date=11 April 2017}}</ref>
=== Blacklisting ===
The MediaWiki title blacklist extension prevents page move vandalism and creation vandalism by using [[regular expressions]] to identify bad titles. Titles on the blacklist can only be created by or moved to by administrators. Pages that are also created repeatedly can be protected to prevent vandals from recreating bad pages.
In addition to the Title Blacklist, the spam blacklist prevents external link [[spamming]], a form of vandalism. New/unregistered users who want to add external links are required to answer a [[CAPTCHA]].
The bad image list prevents images that are commonly used to vandalize pages from being inserted, such as images with sexual content.
The entirety of the MediaWiki namespace, the main page, and high risk templates are protected to prevent high server load and sudden interface changes.
The edit filter can also prevent vandalism by disallowing the bad edit altogether.
== Notable acts of vandalism ==
=== Seigenthaler incident ===
{{main|Wikipedia Seigenthaler biography incident}}
[[File:John Seigenthaler Sr. speaking.jpg|thumb|alt=White-haired elderly gentleman in suit and tie speaks at a podium.|[[John Seigenthaler]], who in 2005 criticized Wikipedia]]
In May 2005, a user edited the [[biography|biographical]] article about [[John Seigenthaler, Sr.]] so that it contained several false and [[defamation|defamatory]] statements.<ref name=SeigenthalerUSAToday>{{cite news|url=https://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2005-11-29-wikipedia-edit_x.htm|work=USA Today|date=29 November 2005|title=A false Wikipedia "biography"|author=[[John Seigenthaler]]}}</ref> The inaccurate claims went unnoticed between May and September 2005, when they were discovered by [[Victor S. Johnson, Jr.]], a friend of Seigenthaler. Wikipedia content is often mirrored at sites such as [[Answers.com]], which means that incorrect information can be replicated alongside correct information through a number of websites. Such information can develop a misleading air of authority because of its presence at such sites:<ref name=SeigenthalerABC>{{cite web|url=http://www.abc.net.au/rn/science/ss/stories/s1613571.htm|title=Mistakes and hoaxes on-line|publisher=Australian Broadcasting Corporation| date=15 April 2006| accessdate=28 April 2007}}</ref>
{{quote|
Then [Seigenthaler's] son discovered that his father's hoax biography also appeared on two other sites, Reference.com and Answers.com, which took direct feeds from Wikipedia. It was out there for four months before Seigenthaler realized and got the Wikipedia entry replaced with a more reliable account. The lies remained for another three weeks on the mirror sites downstream.
}}
=== Stephen Colbert ===
{{See also|Cultural impact of The Colbert Report#Wikipedia references|label 1=Wikipedia references on The Colbert Report}}
Comedian [[Stephen Colbert]] made repeated references to Wikipedia on his TV show ''[[The Colbert Report]]'', frequently suggesting on air that his viewers vandalize selected pages. These instances include the following:
* On a 2006 episode of his show, Colbert suggested viewers vandalize the article "[[Elephant]]". This resulted in an account named "[[User:Stephencolbert|Stephencolbert]]" being blocked from editing, as well as many elephant-related articles being protected.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.tvsquad.com/2006/08/01/did-colbert-hack-wikipedia-video/ |title=Did Colbert hack Wikipedia? – VIDEO |publisher=Tvsquad.com |accessdate=7 June 2012 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20110119215141/http://www.tvsquad.com/2006/08/01/did-colbert-hack-wikipedia-video/ |archivedate=19 January 2011 }}</ref>
* On 7 August 2012, Colbert suggested that his viewers go to pages for possible 2012 U.S. Republican vice presidential candidates, such as the [[Tim Pawlenty]] and [[Rob Portman]] articles, and edit them many times. This was in response to a [[Fox News Channel|Fox News]] hypothesis that mass editing of the [[Sarah Palin]] page the day before she was announced as [[John McCain]]'s running mate could help predict who would be chosen as [[Mitt Romney]]'s running mate in the [[United States presidential election, 2012|2012 election]]. After Colbert's request and his viewers' subsequent actions, all these articles were put under {{srlink|Wikipedia:Protection policy#Semi-protection|semi-protection}} by Wikipedia administrators, with editing restricted to established users.<ref>{{cite web | title=Stephen Colbert's Wikipedia Vice Presidential Scheme Short Circuited | url=http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/stephen-colberts-wikipedia-vice-presidential-359985 | work=The Hollywood Reporter | date=8 August 2012 | accessdate=8 August 2012}}</ref>
When Wikipedia co-founder [[Jimmy Wales]] appeared as a guest on 24 May 2007 episode of ''The Colbert Report'', they discussed Colbert-related vandalism. Wales later said on the show that he may have to lock down the entire [[Spanish Wikipedia|Spanish-language Wikipedia]] for a few days after Colbert commented that perhaps it should learn English.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.comedycentral.com/colbertreport/videos.jhtml?videoId=87528|title=Jimmy Wales|publisher=[[Comedy Central]]|date=24 May 2007 |accessdate=2 September 2008 |archiveurl = https://web.archive.org/web/20080510170626/http://www.comedycentral.com/colbertreport/videos.jhtml?videoId=87528 |archivedate = 10 May 2008}}</ref>
=== Hillsborough disaster vandalism ===
{{Main|Hillsborough Wikipedia posts}}
In April 2014, the ''[[Liverpool Echo]]'' reported that computers on an intranet used by the [[Government of the United Kingdom|United Kingdom government]] had been used to post offensive remarks about the [[Hillsborough disaster]] on Wikipedia pages relating to the subject. The government announced that it would launch an inquiry into the reports.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-27165844 |work=BBC News |title=Hillsborough Wikipedia posts were 'sickening', Cabinet Office says |publisher=BBC |date=25 April 2014 |accessdate=25 April 2014}}</ref> Following the allegations, ''[[The Daily Telegraph]]'' reported that government computers appeared to have been used to vandalize a number of other articles, often adding insulting remarks to biographical articles, and in one case falsely reporting a death.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wikipedia/10791202/Des-Lynam-killed-by-a-giant-snowball-and-other-embarrassing-Wikipedia-edits-from-Whitehall-computers.html |title=Des Lynam 'killed by a giant snowball' and other embarrassing Wikipedia edits from Whitehall computers |first=Oliver |last=Duggan |newspaper=The Daily Telegraph |publisher=Telegraph Media Group |date=27 April 2014 |accessdate=4 May 2014}}</ref>
=== Other notable acts of vandalism ===
{{importance section|date=October 2016}}
* A vandal called Willy on Wheels renamed thousands of articles so that their titles ended with "on wheels".<ref>{{cite news|last1=Dee|first1=Jonathan|title=Wikipedia - Computers and the Internet - Encyclopedias - News and News Media|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/01/magazine/01WIKIPEDIA-t.html|accessdate=26 May 2018|work=New York Times|date=1 July 2007}}</ref>
* In 2006, ''[[Rolling Stone]]'' printed a story about [[Halle Berry]] based on false information from Wikipedia, which had arisen from an act of Wikipedia vandalism.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Rolling_Stone_prints_story_based_on_Wikipedia_vandalism |title=Rolling Stone prints story based on Wikipedia vandalism – Wikinews, the free news source |publisher=En.wikinews.org |accessdate=7 June 2012}}</ref>
* In August 2007, local media from the Netherlands reported that several IP addresses from [[Nederlandse Publieke Omroep (organization)|Nederlandse Publieke Omroep]] had been blocked from Wikipedia for adding "false and defamatory" information to pages.<ref>{{cite news|title=Wikipedia blokkeert medewerkers publieke omroep|url=http://www.volkskrant.nl/recensies/wikipedia-blokkeert-medewerkers-publieke-omroep~a873862/|website=De Volkskrant|accessdate=3 April 2017|language=Dutch|date=30 August 2007}}</ref> A similar incident occurred with the [[Minister of the Interior (France)|Minister of the Interior]] in France in January 2016.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Tual|first1=Morgane|title=Une adresse IP du ministère de l’intérieur bloquée sur Wikipédia pour « vandalisme »|url=http://www.lemonde.fr/pixels/article/2016/01/13/une-adresse-ip-du-ministere-de-l-interieur-bloquee-sur-wikipedia-pour-vandalisme_4846544_4408996.html|website=LeMonde.fr|accessdate=3 April 2017|language=French|date=13 January 2016}}</ref>
* Professional golfer [[Fuzzy Zoeller]] sued a Miami company whose IP-based edits to the Wikipedia site included negative information about him.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.tomshardware.com/news/golfer-sues-wikipedia-vandalism,4377.html|title=Pro golfer sues over Wikipedia vandalism|last=Cheung|first=Humphrey|date=26 February 2007|publisher=Tom's Hardware}}</ref>
* In May 2012, media critic [[Anita Sarkeesian]] created a [[Kickstarter]] project, intending to raise money to make a series of videos exploring sexism in digital gaming culture.<ref>{{cite book|author=Carlen Lavigne|title=Cyberpunk Women, Feminism and Science Fiction: A Critical Study|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1gOPZ_AQl5gC&pg=PA184|accessdate=20 April 2013|date=24 January 2013|publisher=McFarland|isbn=978-0-7864-6653-5|page=184}}</ref> The idea evoked a hostile response,<ref name=dearinternet>{{cite news|url=http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/internet/2012/06/dear-internet-why-you-cant-have-anything-nice|publisher=New Statesman|title=Dear The Internet, This Is Why You Can't Have Anything Nice|author=Helen Lewis|date=12 June 2012|accessdate=20 April 2013}}</ref> which included repeated vandalism of Sarkeesian's Wikipedia article with pornographic imagery, defamatory statements, and threats of sexual violence.<ref name="Weckerle2013">{{cite book|author=Andrea Weckerle|title=Civility in the Digital Age: How Companies and People Can Triumph over Haters, Trolls, Bullies and Other Jerks|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=64P3Y_c-ufEC&pg=PT33|accessdate=20 April 2013|date=13 February 2013|publisher=Que Publishing|isbn=978-0-13-313498-8|page=33}}</ref> More than 12 anonymous editors contributed to the ongoing vandalism campaign before editing privileges were revoked for the page.<ref name=dearinternet/>
* In November 2012, the [[Leveson Inquiry|Leveson report]]—published in the [[United Kingdom|UK]] by [[Brian Leveson|Lord Justice Leveson]]—incorrectly listed a "Brett Straub" as one of the founders of ''[[The Independent]]'' newspaper. The name originated from one of the several erroneous edits by one of Straub's friends as a prank to Wikipedia by falsely including his name in several articles across the site. The name's inclusion in the report suggested that that part of the report relating to that newspaper had been cut and pasted from Wikipedia without a proper check of the sources.<ref name="Straub incident">{{cite news|last=Allen|first=Nick|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/leveson-inquiry/9723296/Wikipedia-the-25-year-old-student-and-the-prank-that-fooled-Leveson.html|title=Wikipedia, the 25-year–old student and the prank that fooled Leveson|publisher=Telegraph Media Group|newspaper=The Daily Telegraph|date=5 December 2012|accessdate=8 December 2012}}</ref><ref name="Straub in Independent">{{cite news|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/press/levesons-wikipedia-moment-how-internet-research-on-the-independents-history-left-him-redfaced-8372446.html|title=Leveson's Wikipedia moment: how internet 'research' on The Independent's history left him red-faced|author=Andy McSmith|work=The Independent|date=30 November 2012}}</ref> The Straub issue was also humorously referenced in broadcasts of BBC entertainment [[current affairs (news format)|current affairs]] TV program ''[[Have I Got News for You]]'' (and extended edition ''Have I Got a Bit More News for You''),<ref name="Straub BBC">{{cite web|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01p8g6s/Have_I_Got_News_for_You_Series_44_Episode_8|title=Have I Got News for You (series 44, episode 8) TV programme|date=7 December 2012 |publisher=BBC|accessdate=12 December 2012}}</ref><ref name="Straub HIGNFY">{{cite web|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1p6qSt0VbA|title=Have I Got News for You: Series 44, Episode 8 (Leveson clip)|date=7 December 2012|publisher=BBC|accessdate=12 December 2012}}</ref> with ''[[The Economist]]'' also making passing comment on the issue: "The Leveson report...Parts of it are a scissors-and-paste job culled from Wikipedia".<ref>{{cite news|title=Hacked to pieces|url=https://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21567944-somewhat-mediocre-report-could-yet-lead-better-press-rules-britain-hacked-pieces|newspaper=The Economist|date=8 December 2012|accessdate=8 December 2012}}</ref>
* In April 2015, ''The [[Washington Post]]'' reported on an experiment by "Gregory Kohs, a former editor, and prominent Wikipedia critic": "Kohs wrapped up an experiment in which he inserted outlandish errors into 31 articles and tracked whether editors ever found them. After more than two months, half of his hoaxes still had not been found—and those included errors on high-profile pages, like "Mediterranean climate" and "inflammation." (By his estimate, more than 100,000 people have now seen the claim that volcanic rock produced by the human body causes inflammation pain.)"<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/04/15/the-great-wikipedia-hoax/ | title=The story behind Jar’Edo Wens, the longest-running hoax in Wikipedia history | date=15 April 2015 | accessdate=19 October 2016 | author=Caitlin Dewey | work=The Washington Post}}</ref>
[[File:Wikipedia_vandalism_-_history_around_revision_672598769.png|thumb|right|The article for [[Donald Trump]] was blanked twice on 22 July 2015.]]
* In July 2015, [[Donald Trump]]'s entire Wikipedia page was replaced with one sentence critical of him.<ref>Ben Popper (22 July 2015). [https://www.theverge.com/2015/7/22/9014525/someone-just-deleted-donald-trumps-entire-wikipedia-page "Someone just deleted Donald Trump's entire Wikipedia page"]. ''The Verge'' (Vox Media).</ref><ref>[http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/donald-trump-wikipedia-deleted "All The Content On Donald Trump's Wikipedia Page Was Just Deleted"]. ''TPM''.</ref><ref>Andrea Peterson (22 July 2015). [https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2015/07/22/donald-trumps-wikipedia-page-was-deleted-today-twice/ "Donald Trump’s Wikipedia page was deleted today. Twice."]. ''Washington Post''.</ref>
* In August 2016, a sentence was added to [[Chad le Clos]]'s Wikipedia page says that he "Died at the hands of [[Michael Phelps]], being literally blown out of the water by the greatest American since Abraham Lincoln" after Phelps won the gold medal for 200-meter butterfly at the [[2016 Summer Olympics]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/08/chad-le-clos-michael-phelps-olympic-games-rio-2016-gold-medal-race-highlights-video|title=Somebody trolled Chad Le Clos with the greatest Wikipedia page edit ever|date=10 August 2016|language=en-US|access-date=12 August 2016}}</ref> This instance of Wikipedia vandalism attracted moderate media attention.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/national-international/Chad-Le-Clos-Wikipedia-Page-Edits-Says-Hes-Dead-Due-to-Phelps-Hands-389730721.html|title=Chad le Clos' Wikipedia Page Edited to Say Phelps Killed Him|access-date=12 August 2016}}</ref>
* In October 2016, both [[Hillary Clinton|Hillary]] and [[Bill Clinton]]'s Wikipedia pages were vandalized and pornographic images added to their articles. This was done by a member of the [[Gay Nigger Association of America]], an Internet trolling group.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://theslot.jezebel.com/hillary-and-bill-clintons-wikipedia-pages-subject-to-ex-1787755920|title=Internet Trolls Vandalize Hillary and Bill Clinton's Wikipedia Pages in Extremely NSFW Way|last=O'Connor|first=Brendan|date=October 13, 2016|access-date=October 13, 2016}}</ref>
* In October 2016 New York Assembly candidate [[Jim Tedisco]]'s Wikipedia page was modified to say that he had "never been part of the majority", and "is considered by many to be a total failure". Tedisco expressed dismay at the changes to his page.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.saratogian.com/general-news/20161022/assemblyman-tediscos-wikipedia-page-vandalized|title=Assemblyman Tedisco's Wikipedia vandalized|last=|first=|date=|website=|publisher=|access-date=}}</ref>
* The week of 29 January 2017 saw various acts of vandalism committed on Wikipedia. White House Press Secretary [[Sean Spicer|Sean Spicer's]] Wikipedia page was vandalized and his picture replaced with that of [[Baghdad Bob]], [[Dana J. Boente]]'s page description was edited to read that he was "the newest sock puppet for the Trump Administration", and [[Paul Ryan|Paul Ryan's]] picture was added to a list of [[invertebrate]]s, with the edit summary stating that he was added due to his lack of a spine. These cases of vandalism attracted media attention.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://nymag.com/selectall/2017/01/funny-wikipedia-edits-about-spicer-paul-ryan-and-yates.html|title=Wikipedia Edits Are the Only Joy in These Fraught Political Times|last=Kircher|first=Madison Malone|newspaper=Select All|language=en|access-date=2 February 2017}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.chron.com/news/politics/us/article/Wikipedia-briefly-listed-politicians-and-other-10891261.php|title=Wikipedia briefly listed politicians and other invertebrates|newspaper=Houston Chronicle|access-date=2 February 2017}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.bostonglobe.com/arts/2017/01/31/from-strange-specimen-paul-ryan-uber-big-dropoff/vmUp4KMqD9wZ0Sq4utDK5I/story.html|title=From the strange specimen of Paul Ryan to Uber’s big dropoff – The Boston Globe|newspaper=BostonGlobe.com|access-date=2 February 2017}}</ref>
* On July 24, 2018, [[Utah]] [[US Senate|senator]] [[Orrin Hatch]] posted humorous [[Twitter|tweet]]s after [[Google]] claimed that he had died on September 11, 2017.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Ehrlich |first1=Jamie |title=GOP senator says he is alive amid Google searches suggesting he is dead |url=https://edition.cnn.com/2018/07/24/politics/orrin-hatch-alive-google-search-dead/index.html |website=[[CNN]] |accessdate=September 11, 2018 |date=July 24, 2018}}</ref> The cause of the error was later revealed to be vandalism on Wikipedia inserting that as Hatch's death date.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Horton |first1=Alex |title=Is Orrin Hatch dead? Let me Google that for you. |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2018/07/24/is-orrin-hatch-dead-let-me-google-that-for-you/ |website=Washington Post |accessdate=September 11, 2018 |date=July 24, 2018}}</ref><ref>[[All Things Considered]] (July 24, 2018), from [[National Public Radio]].</ref><ref>The actual edit was here: {{cite web |author1=Wikipedia contributors |authorlink1=Wikipedians |title=Orrin Hatch: Difference between revisions |url=https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Orrin_Hatch&type=revision&diff=851804083&oldid=851803618 |website=Wikipedia |publisher=Wikimedia Foundation |accessdate=24 July 2018}}</ref>
* On September 27, 2018, the personal information of United States senators [[Lindsey Graham]], [[Mike Lee (American politician)|Mike Lee]], and [[Orrin Hatch]] were added to their respective Wikipedia articles during the hearing of Supreme Court Nominee Judge [[Brett Kavanaugh]]. The information included their home addresses and phone numbers, and originated from the network located from within the [[United States House of Representatives]]. The edits were removed from Wikipedia and hidden from public view shortly afterwards.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://gizmodo.com/republican-senators-doxed-while-interviewing-kavanaugh-1829376044|publisher=[[Gizmodo]]|title=Republican Senators Doxed While Interviewing Kavanaugh|last=Cameron|first=Dell|date=September 27, 2018|accessdate=October 30, 2018}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/someone-on-capitol-hill-just-doxxed-republican-sens-mike-lee-orrin-hatch-and-lindsey-graham|publisher=[[Washington Examiner]]|title=Someone on Capitol Hill just 'doxed' Republican Sens. Mike Lee, Orrin Hatch, and Lindsey Graham|last=Wegmann|first=Philip|date=September 27, 2018|accessdate=October 30, 2018}}</ref> These edits were captured and automatically posted publicly to [[Twitter]] by an automated account. Twitter shortly removed the posts and suspended the account in response to the incident.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.foxnews.com/politics/republican-senators-doxxed-on-wikipedia-by-someone-from-house-of-representatives-after-kavanaugh-hearing|publisher=[[FOX News]]|title=Republican senators doxxed on Wikipedia by someone from House of Representatives after Kavanaugh hearing|last=Mikelionis|first=Lukas|date=September 28, 2018|accessdate=October 30, 2018}}</ref> An internal police investigation located the person who made the edits, and 27-year-old Jackson A. Cosko (a staffer for Congress paid by an outside institution) was arrested and charged with multiple felony crimes relating to the incident.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.dailywire.com/news/36826/report-dem-staffer-arrested-doxxing-republican-emily-zanotti|publisher=[[Daily Wire]]|title=REPORT: The Dem Staffer Arrested For Doxxing Republican Senators WASN'T An Intern|last=Zanotti|first=Emily|date=October 7, 2018|accessdate=October 30, 2018}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/sns-tns-bc-congress-doxxing-20181003-story.html|publisher=[[New York Daily News]]|title=Suspect in congressional doxxing cases arrested|last=Dick|first=Jason|date=October 3, 2018|accessdate=October 30, 2018}}</ref>
== See also ==
{{Portal|Internet}}
*[[Reliability of Wikipedia]]
== References ==
{{reflist|30em}}
{{Wikipedia}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Vandalism On Wikipedia}}
[[Category:Wikipedia]]
[[Category:Vandalism]]
[[Category:Wikipedia reliability]]
