Wikipedia UnReliable Sources: Case Study— How Wikipedia is Rigged to Prevent Balance When It Comes to Religious Articles

Failed efforts to Correct Wikipedia Articles About The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

As covered in recent articles in this series, Wikipedia has, almost since its inception, been criticized for its inability or refusal to present religious subjects without bias. Despite the “democratic process” of the platform by which “anyone can edit,” an oligarchy of top-ranked editors and admins, many of whom operate anonymously, determine “truth.” They do so by requiring citations from “reliable sources” for anything stated in an article. Their edicts of what may or may not be considered “reliable” reveal what some have called the decidedly left-leaning proclivity of these influential editors and admins. They also freeze or lock pages and have the power to ban certain editors or disallow rank file editing of various religious and other “contentious” topics.

A 2012 article by Roger Nicholson in Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship looks at the dynamics of this problem.

It describes a certain allure in becoming a Wikipedia editor. “Wikipedia becomes an attractive way for … editors to ‘publish’ their opinions with immediate worldwide visibility and considerable credibility.”

Initial Attempts at Correcting LDS articles in Wikipedia

Nicholson began his project by making edits in noncontroversial areas in the online encyclopedia. That was relatively simple and met with success. However, Nicholson, a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, came to realize the futility of trying to influence the platform when it came to his religion.

In an article in the Deseret News, he speaks of his frustration and the outright refusal of editors to correct what Nicholson asserted and documented to be biased or false descriptions of his faith, its principals, and history.

Nicholson realized he wasn’t the only one who wanted to define Mormonism.

“Two main factions battle for control of Mormon articles on Wikipedia,” according to the article.  “On one side are Mormons who want articles to leave room for belief. They want positive facts of history to be prominent. On the other side are people who do not believe in the LDS Church. They want negative aspects of history to take precedence. Both sides think they are being neutral.”

Wiki Challenges

Nicholson argues in his Interpreter article that the Wikipedia model fails when it comes to controversial religious subjects.

“Articles dealing with highly controversial subjects, such as Joseph Smith’s first vision or polygamy, do not tend to stabilize themselves over time,” he wrote. But such topics attract editors with strong personal or ideological biases, leading to constant edits and ‘edit wars.’”

Putting Pressure on Wikipedia from Outside

Eventually, Nicholson found it impossible to influence or rectify the bias of influential editors on key articles on the LDS Church, its beliefs or practices.

In the end, his experience as an editor in Wikipedia convinced him that the only way to defeat the negative spin and undue influence built into the system would be from outside. He became an editor for FAIR, an alternative Wiki that “provides faithful answers to questions about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.”

As described in the Deseret News article, “Nicholson got out his frustrations by posting the text of several Mormon articles from Wikipedia and then citing every Wikipedia rule the editors broke.

“When they became aware of that, they complained all over the place about that. So, in essence, it had the desired effect. I had more influence on those articles by posting what I did on the FAIR website than I ever did by trying to edit them directly.”

We want to hear from you! If you are a religious leader, a parishioner, or a Wikipedia editor who has come across biased and skewed religious coverage in Wikipedia, we encourage you to submit an article or a write-up of how Wikipedia has misrepresented religion; send this to our editors at wrn-info@proton.me. Your insights are very valuable for ensuring accurate and comprehensive information is available to the public.