While the first of Wikipedia’s key policies—that Wikipedia works by building consensus—defies reasoning in favor of relativism, Wikipedia has nevertheless become a useful tool—providing you’re equipped with a finely-tuned BS detector. The whole idea of Wikipedia centers on the idea of marshalling the collective expertise of people who use the internet. The result is arguably a glimmering example of how no good idea goes unpunished.

The problem is that anyone can add content to Wikipedia, and damn near every wing-nut with an internet connection has. Hence, Wikipedia has small army of volunteers who search for and undo unhelpful contributions. This problem is compounded by the fact that Wikipedia permits anonymous contributions. Consequently, content that arises out of less than altruistic motives can appear anywhere, at anytime. The problem is so prevalent that some pages are a joke.

When Virgil Griffith, a Cal Tech computer and neural-systems grad student, read about Congressmen “cleaning up” their Wikipedia pages, he wrote WikiScanner, a utility that scans the millions of Wikipedia contributions and ties them, obliquely, to the contributor. Why only obliquely? When you contribute content or commentary on Wikipedia, you leave information behind that includes, among other things, your IP (Internet Protocol) address. This isn’t exactly a fingerprint, but it is telling. While an IP address cannot tell exactly who wrote a particular comment, the “Whois” command identifies the organization that provided the IP address. According to Griffith, “we… know [a Wikipedia] edit came from someone with access to [a company’s] network. If the edit occurred during working hours, then we can reasonably assume that the person is either an agent of that company or a guest that was allowed access to their network.”

WikiScanner automates this process and allows a comprehensive examination of who’s writing what. WikiScanner is very easy to use and generates arresting results. In only a matter of days, WikiScanner has identified a number of well-known organizations making highly unprofessional and inflamatory Wikipedia edits.

For example, on the Condoleeza Rice page, a user given an IP address by the New York Times changed “concert pianist” to “concert penis.” Another lightening rod for vandalism is the George W. Bush page. Again, an NYT contributor inserted “jerk jerk jerk jerk jerk jerk jerk jerk jerk jerk jerk jerk” into the page, and a user from the British Broadcasting Corporation changed Bush’s middle initial to “Wanker.” On the Tom Delay page, another NYT contributor changed the phrase “prominent member of the Republican Party” to “Grand Dragon of the Republican Party.”

Clever? Perhaps. If only in an adolescent way. But not all examples are so innocuous. For example, on Wikipedia’s Israel page, a user from Al Jezeera offered this:

Israel is only created in 1948 after the Jews fled from the hands of Hitler. The Jews did to the indigenous people of Palestine what Hitler had done to them. Jews were the first people to start the terrorist attacks in the region. They have stolen the land of the Palestinians. Jews believe that they are chosen by God and that they are better than other people.

Similarly, a user from the austere United Nations slandered the late Oriana Fallaci by describing her as a “racist whore.”

So why did Griffith develop Wikiscanner? According to WikiScanner’s FAQ page, Griffith developed it “to create minor public relations disasters for companies and organizations I dislike.” Want to know which pages people from the IAEA like to edit? How about the White House? It’s all possible with WikiScanner.

Currently, Griffith has disabled WikiScanner’s Wikipedia page scan feature because his site is getting so much traffic, but you can still scan by organization name, IP address ranges for organizations submitted by previous WikiScanner users, IP address range, and IP address.

In effect, Griffith has single-handedly mitigated an adverse effect of anonymous Wikipedia contributions. Will WikiScanner eliminate the kinds of vandalism and idiocy that compromise Wikipedia’s credibility? Of course not. But WikiScanner introduces a contributor accountability Wikipedia badly needed.

I say well done Mr. Griffith.

Cheers,