Skip to main content


In honor of discovering that I've apparently had a Wikipedia page for a few months, I decided to tell the story of why I'm not a Wikipedian (a story I told Jimmy Wales lol) and this seems like the kind of thing that might interest you all: https://www.instagram.com/p/C5i1r68Lyk-/

Though TL;DR if you don't want to watch a four minute video, my attempt to increase coverage of children's literature on Wikipedia was met with exactly the kinds of gatekeeping acrimonious jerk behavior you might expect.

in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

Relatable, the first time I did more than a minor typo fix, and spent a couple hours to make a page a bunch better, someone just reverted the whole thing rather than improving it further, or any other constructive choice of action.

I haven’t really bothered with anything that isn’t minor since then.

in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

@ahundt I added an entry to the B-1B lancer page that I knew about because I’d watched it happen (nose-gear not lowered landing at Edwards AFB) and found news articles on it online (a bit of a trick since it happened in 1989 or so and wasn’t really major news) and I *still* had to fight for it.

I was like “yeah, fuck this, if I want random feral attacks for no reason, I have a cat. And at least the cat is sometimes cuddly.”

in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

I sadly have seen this before around 2010 was most shocking to me. Someone made an awesome article in sandbox, asking on the German Wikipedia irc channel whether it was ok, and got all the good vibes to move it into main from various seasoned folks.
No 5 mins passed until a deletion request was on it. 24 hrs of folks arguing and even on the Wikipedia irc someone in earnest said "if you get your first article deleted, your second one will be better. It encourages to become better"
in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

I just watched your video twice.. and.. did you get at least little revenge?? I mean the apology is nice(ish) but..
in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

Yeah when I was in high school I tried in earnest to be an active Wikipedia editor. I watched over the years as all my contributions were systematically reverted and erased. People have even been deleting pages from my USERSPACE for Pete's sake!

Pretty much all that remains now of a year's worth of work are my contributions to wikimedia commons. At least people rarely delete stuff there.

Ultimately it feels like they don't value the time of contributors.

in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

Also does anyone who does Wikipedia work know if there have been improvements re: hounding/edit stalking since the new code of conduct that was released a few years ago? Someone mentioned to me years ago that they were attempting to address this exact kind of behavior though I have no idea if it's been successful.
in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

Update: my Wikipedia page has been nominated for deletion for lack of notability 😂
in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

this should trigger a controversy so big that it will deserve a Wikipedia page 😀
in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

Looks like it's headed toward a keep. I'm sorry you've had to go through this, and it's especially bad coming on top of your previous experience. Which i appreciate you talking about. @andresmh
in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

i made a bunch of wikipedia pages for colleagues like 10 years ago, and most/all still exist(!), then one tried to make one for me, and it was rejected or nominated for deletion or whatever, lol
in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

mr. wales did not care! actually, some shade to the anonymous person who tried to make my page -- it's pretty easy to get academics to have wikipedia pages and keep them, but there's definitely unwritten rules about what you gotta do to make the person "noteworthy" or whatever. notwithstanding random troll people who probably try to take down pages. the legit wikipedians can be assuaged by things like a certain number of legit references and things like that.
in reply to Jeffrey P. Bigham 🔥🔥

@jbigham there are some folks already fighting in AFD for me which I much appreciate. Also I knew that maintaining a stupidly comprehensive press page on my website would be helpful someday!
in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

Yes—you’re a woman, so not noteworthy to some Wikipedia editors. Sexism strikes again.
in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

Update: The way the Articles for Deletion discussion is going, I suspect my page will stay. But it is a fascinating experience watching people argue about whether I have "a large scholarly influence over [my] subject area" and minutiae about the authority of news sources that have written me and whether NSF CAREER awards are prestigious. "Notability" is such a fascinating social construct. :)
in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

I, too, am not a Wikipedian, but if I were, I would be on the inclusionary end of things.
in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

this would make for a great myspace-shorts vid or a friendster-reels!
in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

Oh yeah, the deletionists are ridiculous, erring on the wide of less information rather than keeping things just in case someone is looking. One of the reasons Wikia was founded was to give people a place to put articles that they couldn't get them.
in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

Yesterday I got two emails from Wikipedia editors offering (paid) services to improve my Wikipedia page so that it isn't deleted. One I just politely declined, but the other I'm still mad about. This email is misleading (less generously, outright lying) and manipulative. It's someone claiming to be a "senior wikipedia consultant" and they have a business webpage for people to pay them to create Wikipedia pages.

I replied asking them for clarification on this email, and they did not respond.

in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

These people are scams and not real volunteer editors. This really gives WP a bad image, but they are very hard to trace.
in reply to Debora Weber-Wulff

@WiseWoman I mean, this guy gave me his wikipedia editor handle and has a website. Is there some way to report him?
in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

@WiseWoman If he's marked as a paid editor on his profile, then he's actually (within tolerances) allowed to do that but it's still sketchy. There is a huge rift between people who think paid editing is AOK and those who think it's a scourge.

(also just fyi if your Wikipedia page winds up with something incorrect on it, ping me and I'll fix. I voted on your AfD)

in reply to Jessamyn

@jessamyn @WiseWoman I’m more concerned about this email implying incorrect information about how deletion works. :-/ (Also thank you!! I was relieved to see good wiki editors coming out in support.)
in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

@WiseWoman Ah! Sounds a lot like this protection scam from 2015.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/sep/02/wikipedia-blocks-editor-accounts-linked-to-extortion-scam

When I looked at how they handled that issue, it was reported initially on the Administrator's Message Board. This is always a bit of a headache because it's just moar inside baseball Wikipedia but it does have the potential to get something taken care of (in this case, reporting that user)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard

in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

you are a woman whose primary job responsibility is not titillating heterosexual men, so you will be nominated for deletion for lack of notability at least three more times
in reply to Brian C. Keegan

@bkeegan hahaha! well I guess I should have known better than to draw attention to it, I should have learned that lesson ten years ago
in reply to Brian C. Keegan

@bkeegan also what happened on 4/2???? Is there some reason a bunch of people googled me? Eep.
in reply to Kyle Thayer

@kylethayer @bkeegan oh could be! Also I’d forgotten about that fake deepfake thing, that was wild. :)
in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

yeah, I like to pull the rug out from students, going from showing them that bots are everywhere online, to actually some things claiming to be bots are humans. I should probably add a story like this too: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/04/amazon-ends-ai-powered-store-checkout-which-needed-1000-video-reviewers/
in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

The replies to this ----^ are, tragically, exactly what I would expect.

Someone needs to get hold of the #Wikipedia Deletion Police and kick their arses good and proper.

in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

do you have a text version of this on your blog or anything please? Many thanks
in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

@afewbugs Oh I should add that the video has captions though, so it can also be read.
in reply to Dr. Casey Fiesler

thanks yes I did read it, just wondered if there was a quicker way to do that somewhere 😂