{{Short description|Blog discussing Wikimedia Foundation projects}} {{pp-move-indef}} {{Infobox website | name = Wikipedia Review | logo = Wikipediareviewlogo.png | logocaption = The Wikipedia Review logo, which uses a white hat | screenshot = | url = {{URL|https://wikipediareview.com/}} | commercial = No | type = Internet watchdog, Internet forum and blog | language = English, German | registration = Optional (required to post) | launch_date = Original site: {{start date and age|2005|11}}<ref name="old_wr archive">{{cite web | url=http://wikipediareview.proboards78.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1132934970&page=1 |title=Original Wikipedia Review on Proboards | publisher=Wikipedia Review |date=2005-11-25 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060117153536/http://wikipediareview.proboards78.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1132934970&page=1|archive-date=2006-01-17 | access-date=2009-04-14 |url-status=dead}}</ref><br />Current site: {{start date and age|2006|02|19}}<ref name="first">{{cite web | url=http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=1|title=First post on wikipediareview.com |publisher=Wikipedia Review|date=2006-02-19 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060531011359/http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=1 | archive-date=2006-05-31}}</ref> | current_status = Offline | revenue = Accepts donations }}
'''Wikipedia Review''' was an Internet forum and blog for the discussion of Wikimedia Foundation projects, in particular the content and conflicts of Wikipedia.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.redorbit.com/news/technology/415771/not_everything_on_wikipedia_is_fact|title=Not everything on Wikipedia is fact|last=Mahadevan |first=Jeremy|date=2006-03-05|work=New Straits Times|access-date=2008-07-01}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.inrp.fr/vst/Dossiers/Wikipedia/Wiki/encyclopedie3.htm|title=L'édition de référence libre et collaborative : le cas de Wikipedia.|publisher=Institut national de recherche pédagogique|date=April 2006|page=7|language=fr|access-date=2008-07-01|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110929005510/http://www.inrp.fr/vst/Dossiers/Wikipedia/Wiki/encyclopedie3.htm|archive-date=2011-09-29|url-status=dead}}</ref> Wikipedia Review sought to act as a watchdog website, scrutinizing Wikipedia and reporting on its flaws.<ref name="spawn">{{cite web|url=http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2006/07/spawn_of_wikipe.html|title=Spawn Of Wikipedia|last=LaPlante|first=Alice|date=2006-07-14|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110612054446/http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2006/07/spawn_of_wikipe.html|archive-date=2011-06-12|work=InformationWeek|access-date=2012-09-01}}</ref> It provided an independent forum to discuss Wikipedia editors and their influence on Wikipedia content. At its peak, participants included current Wikipedia editors, former Wikipedia editors, users banned from Wikipedia, and people who had never edited.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.brooklynrail.org/2008/06/express/nobodys-safe-in-cyber-space|title=Nobody's safe in cyberspace|last=Shankbone|first=David|date=June 2008|work=The Brooklyn Rail|access-date=2008-07-01}}</ref> The last post was on 31 May 2012.<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Wikipedia Review |url=http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?act=rssout&id=2 |access-date=2023-05-05 |publisher=wikipediareview.com}}</ref>
==Background== The site was founded in November 2005 by "Igor Alexander", and hosted by ProBoards.<ref name="old_wr archive" /> On 19 February 2006 it moved to its own domain name using Invision Power Board software.<ref name="first" /><ref name="second">{{cite web | url=http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=2&st=0&p=2&mode=linear#entry2 | title=Second post on wikipediareview.com | publisher=Wikipedia Review | quote=''Was The Wikipedia Review created by Igor Alexander?'' Yes. ''Is The Wikipedia Review run by Igor Alexander?'' No. | access-date=2012-01-23 | archive-date=2019-04-04 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190404172618/http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=2&st=0&p=2&mode=linear#entry2 | url-status=dead }}</ref><!-- hosting is different than just using software - should clarify whether hosting is provided by Invision Power Services --> The site required registration using a valid e-mail address to post and blacklisted email providers that allowed anonymity so as to discourage the operation of multiple accounts by a single user.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=286&st=0&p=2163&mode=linear#entry2163|title=Info for new registrants|date=2006-03-24|publisher=Wikipedia Review|access-date=2008-07-01|archive-date=2015-05-25|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150525162747/http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=286&st=0&p=2163&mode=linear#entry2163|url-status=dead}}</ref> In its early years, the forum became a gathering place for critics of Wikipedia and its policies, attracting both former editors and outside observers interested in discussing issues related to online collaboration and reliability of information.
Wikipedia Review was cited for its discussion of wiki-editing concepts and its participation in the evaluation of the Palo Alto Research Company's WikiDashboard.<ref name="aug">{{cite web|title=Augmented social cognition: understanding social foraging and social sensemaking |url=http://www-users.cs.umn.edu/~echi/papers/2008-AAAI/2008-AAAI-AugSocialCognition.pdf |author=Ed H. Chi |author2=Peter Pirolli |author3=Bongwon Suh |author4=Aniket Kittur |author5=Bryan Pendleton |author6=Todd Mytkowicz|year=2008|publisher=Palo Alto Research Center|pages=5|access-date=2008-07-01}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |author=Bongwon Suh |author2=Ed H. Chi |author3=Aniket Kittur |author4=Bryan A. Pendleton |others=General chairs: Mary Czerwinski and Arnie Lund; program chair: Desney Tan. |title=Lifting the veil: improving accountability and social transparency in Wikipedia with wikidashboard|publisher=Association for Computing Machinery |year=2008 |pages=1037–1040 |series=Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems |url=http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1357214 |access-date=2008-07-01 |isbn=978-1-60558-011-1}}</ref><ref>{{cite conference |author1=Chi, E. H. |author2=Suh, B. |author3=Kittur, A. |date=2008-04-06 |title=Providing social transparency through visualizations in Wikipedia |conference=CHI 2008, Florence, Italy |others=Social Data Analysis Workshop |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228979792 |access-date=2024-02-15 |via=ResearchGate |s2cid=2303183}}</ref>
==Commentary== {{blockquote|Wikipedia Review is not a conspiracy, a team-building exercise, a role-playing game, or an experiment in collusion. It is not meant as a resource or training ground for those who would instill fear and misery in others. It does not exist to corrupt, but to expose corruption; it does not exist to tear down institutions, but to expose the ways in which institutions are torn down; it does not exist to hate, but is meant to expose hate in others. To expose these things is not evil. It is not a monolithic entity, nor the sum of its parts. Like-mindedness does not imply singularity of purpose; respect for the rights of one group does not imply disrespect for the rights of another. It is not intended to be predictable, consistent, or dull.
Imagine a world in which human beings are not user accounts, are not programmable, and are not mere words on a display screen. ''That's what we're doing...'' |Statement made when the site was out of service in 2008|Wikipedia Review<ref>{{cite web|url=http://cc.msnscache.com/cache.aspx?q=73566819655071&mkt=en-US&setlang=en-US&w=91528194,5874ca3e&FORM=CVRE|title=Wikipedia Review out-of-service page|date=2008-06-24|access-date=2008-07-02|publisher=Wikipedia Review|archive-url=https://archive.today/20240524053549/https://www.webcitation.org/5Z0pjEk6t?url=http://cc.msnscache.com/cache.aspx%3Fq=73566819655071&mkt=en-US&setlang=en-US&w=91528194,5874ca3e&FORM=CVRE|archive-date=2024-05-24|url-status=live}}</ref>}} Seth Finkelstein wrote in ''The Guardian'' that Wikipedia Review has provided a focal point for investigation into Wikipedia-related matters such as the "Essjay controversy".<ref name="finkel">{{cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2007/dec/06/wikipedia|title=Inside, Wikipedia is more like a sweatshop than Santa's workshop|last=Finkelstein|first=Seth|date=2007-12-06|work=The Guardian|access-date=2008-07-01}}</ref><ref name="Wikipedia Review Essjay thread">{{cite web |url=http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=2778 |title=Who is Essjay?, Probably he's Ryan Jordan |work=Wikipedia Review |date=2006-07-26 |access-date=2012-03-29 |archive-date=2009-02-20 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090220141509/http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=2778 |url-status=dead }}</ref> {{ill|Cade Metz|qid=Q106514927}}, writing for ''The Register'', credited Wikipedia Review with the discovery of a private mailing list that led to the resignation of a Wikipedia administrator; he also wrote that a Wikipedia proposal called "BADSITES" intended to ban the mention of Wikipedia Review and similar sites on Wikipedia.<ref name="list">{{cite web|url=https://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/04/wikipedia_secret_mailing/page2.html|title=Secret mailing list rocks Wikipedia|last=Metz|first=Cade|date=2007-12-04|work=The Register|access-date=2008-07-01}}</ref> ''The Independent'' noted that "allegations against certain administrators came to a head on a site called Wikipedia Review, where people debate the administrators' actions."<ref name="cyber">{{cite web|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/features/cyberclinic-who-are-the-editors-of-wikipedia-764529.html|title=Cyberclinic: Who are the editors of Wikipedia?|last=Marsden|first=Rhodri|author-link=Rhodri Marsden|date=2007-12-06|work=The Independent|access-date=2008-07-01}}</ref> The Irish technology website Silicon Republic suggested visiting Wikipedia Review in order to "follow disputes, discussions, editors and general bureaucracy on Wikipedia".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.siliconrepublic.com/news/news.nv?storyid=single9782|title=Wikipedia under fire for 'editorial elite'| last=Boran|first=Marie|date=2007-12-04|publisher=Silicon Republic| access-date=2008-07-01|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090422060827/http://www.siliconrepublic.com/news/news.nv?storyid=single9782|archive-date=2009-04-22}}</ref> Philip Coppens used posts made on Wikipedia Review to help construct a report, published in ''Nexus'', on WikiScanner and allegations that intelligence agencies had been using Wikipedia to spread disinformation.<ref name="nexus">{{cite web|url=http://www.nexusmagazine.com/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_view&gid=86&Itemid=71|title=The Truths and Lies of WikiWorld|last=Coppens|first=Philip|date=October–November 2007|work=Nexus|pages=11–15, 77|access-date=2008-07-02}}</ref>
==Content and structure== Wikipedia Review's publicly accessible forums are broken up into four general topic areas: # Forum information; # Wikimedia-oriented discussion, which contains subforums focusing on editors, the Wikipedia bureaucracy, meta discussion, articles and general Wikimedia-focused topics not fitting elsewhere; # Media forums containing a news feed and discussion about news and blogs featuring Wikipedia/Wikimedia; and # Off topic, non-Wikimedia related discussion.<ref name="main">{{cite web|url=http://wikipediareview.com/|title=Wikipedia Review|access-date=9 June 2010|archive-date=3 June 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100603082928/http://wikipediareview.com/|url-status=dead}}</ref>
==References== {{reflist}}
==External links== {{Portal|Internet}} *{{official website|http://wikipediareview.com}} *{{Cite web |url=http://wikipediareview.proboards78.com/ |title=Archived Wikipedia Review site |access-date=December 29, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240915140638/http://wikipediareview.com/ |archive-date=September 15, 2024 |url-status=dead |df=mdy-all }}
{{Wikipediahistory}}
Category:Critics of Wikipedia Category:History of Wikipedia Category:Internet forums Category:Internet properties established in 2005