Why this Site?

  • Our Mission:
  • We exist to shine the light of scrutiny into the dark crevices of Wikipedia and its related projects; to examine the corruption there, along with its structural flaws; and to inoculate the unsuspecting public against the torrent of misinformation, defamation, and general nonsense that issues forth from one of the world’s most frequently visited websites, the “encyclopedia that anyone can edit.”
  • How you can participate:
  •  Visit the Wikipediocracy Forum, a candid exchange of views between Wikipedia editors, administrators, critics, proponents, and the general public.
  • 'Like' our Wikipediocracy page on Facebook.
  •  Follow Wikipediocracy on Twitter!

Press Releases

  • Please click here for recent Wikipediocracy press releases.

I Got Fired For Editing Wikipedia

Mike Wood, paid editor, is fired from his day job for editing Wikipedia. This is his story.

…continue reading I Got Fired For Editing Wikipedia

How to Ban a POV You Dislike, in 9 Easy Steps

by Dtobias

Editor’s note: this essay appeared originally at Wikipedia, where it is accompanied by an elaborate disclaimer which assures the reader that the essay is intended to be humorous and that “It is not, has never been, nor will ever be, a Wikipedia policy or guideline. Rather, it illustrates standards or conduct that are generally not accepted by the Wikipedia community.” Me, I’m not so sure.

Also, by way of explanation, a “POV” in WikiJargon means a “point of view,” or what for ordinary folks would be called a “bias” or “prejudice.”


This page in a nutshell: If you play your cards right, you can make your POV on an issue the only one legal to express here!

Do your best to bait, prod, and aggravate somebody on the opposing side of an ideological war from yourself into acting uncivil out of frustration with you. If you have friends, get together with them to gang up on your opponents and get them angry and desperate. When the opponent finally does something that can be construed as a violation of policy, get a friendly admin to block him/her. When the blocked editor uses the means still available to him/her, such as his/her talk page and the e-mail feature, to complain about the unfairness of the block, get your admin friend to bind and gag the editor by removing talk page posting and e-mailing privileges for “trolling” and “harassment”. With the editor forcibly silenced and thus unable to speak in his/her defense, hold a lynch mob ban discussion on WP:AN/I, with your friends once again ganging up. This works best when the blocked user lacks friends to gang up on his/her behalf; if that happens, you’d really have drama, but if there aren’t any, you’ll just get an open-and-shut

…continue reading How to Ban a POV You Dislike, in 9 Easy Steps

The Duck Test

By Hersch

Duck What is the point of having The Encylopedia That Not Just Anyone Can Edit? Well, to make money, of course, somewhere down the line. But for the Wikipedians who toil day in and day out, with no hope of remuneration, there is another kind of reward: the satisfaction of knowing that one’s personal set of prejudices, or what is known at Wikipedia as one’s Point of View (POV), has become the dominant one on a given set of articles. Once an editor has ascended high enough in the pecking order, becoming one of Wikipedia’s leading peckers, he or she may hope to have his or her prejudices incorporated into the “House POV,” where they will be enshrined informally in Wikipedia Policy and protected against all outsiders.

How does one define the “House POV”? Well, it’s like porn. As U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Potter Stewart famously said, hard-core pornography is hard to define, “but I know it when I see it.” But how does one defend it against interlopers? Initially it was not easy, but as Wikipedia has evolved and matured over the years, the means of defense have been perfected in the “Duck Test.”

Because Wikipedians edit using pseudonymous screen names and therefore have no legal responsibility for what they write, sockpuppetry becomes an issue. Does Wikipedia oppose the practice of sockpuppetry? That depends, as usual, on who is doing it. Plus, it is difficult to detect, and difficult to prove. In fact, because of the way Wikipedia is structured, it is difficult to prove that any given editor is not a sock. But don’t take my word for it:

Do not make an unblock request that includes

…continue reading The Duck Test