Religion Watch Archives

Monitoring Trends in Religion - From February 1990 to January 2016

  • Home
  • About
  • Contact
  • Archives
    • By Issue
    • By Article
    • By PDF (2008-14)
    • By PDF (1985-97)
    • All Articles
  • Sections
    • Current Research
    • Findings & Footnotes
    • On/File
  • Google Search
You are here: Home / Archive / Religious editors and sources battle on Wikepedia

Religious editors and sources battle on Wikepedia

August 1, 2014 by Richard Cimino

Print-friendly

Religion has become one of the most contested and “vandalized” topics on Wikipedia, the collaboratively edited online encyclopedia.

In a July 24 Religion News Service article (with support by Google), Sarah Pulliam Bailey notes that religion is among several of the top 100 altered topics on Wikipedia. She cites a recent list by the FiveThirtyEight Data Lab, among the most edited topics on the site are Jesus, the Catholic Church, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Muhammad, Islam and Scientology.

Religious topics are one of the top 100 most frequently vandalized on Wikipedia. // Creative Commons image by Taylor McKnight

Religious topics are one of the top 100 most frequently vandalized on Wikipedia. // Creative Commons image by Taylor McKnight

Volunteer editors of Wikipedia, known as Wikipedians, often face a challenge in stopping online hate speech directed toward religious subjects, people and groups.

Bailey reports that Mormonism has been another contested topic, with church adherents and opponents often sparring via their additions and subtractions of controversial topics related to the religion, particularly polygamy and sacred but secret temple rituals.

Part of the tension comes from the diverse makeup of Wikipedians—“a large percentage self-identify as atheists, followed by Christians, Muslims, ‘Pastafarians’ (devotees of a satirical religion known as the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster) and Jews,” she adds. Most of the edits to Wikipedia articles, especially the ones on religion, are made by men, with women accounting for just seven percent of the edits, according to a 2011 University of Minnesota study.

It is particularly the smaller religions that have the most passionate editors, although the more obscure ones are covered less adequately. One editor says that “An enemy (or friend) of a `cult’ in Equador could find sources supporting their personal positions and the obscurity of the topic in English will make it hard or impossible for most of us to confirm or deny.”

He adds that by using Wikipedia’s rules of independent verification, it can be difficult to confirm facts about religions and religious figures, “especially when there’s a range of opinions about what events took place and what they mean.”

Print-friendly

Filed Under: Archive

Also in this issue

  • Findings & Footnotes: August 2014
  • Faith-inspired schools losing market share but still playing role in Africa
  • Demands for complete control over the Temple Mount growing among religious Jews
  • Saudi Arabia’s religious scholars and jihadism: a dilemma for government
  • The bewitching of Romanian politics
  • Polish Catholicism facing dissent, secular pressures
  • Current Research: August 2014
  • Competition stirring for religious TLDs on the Internet
  • Jehovah’s Witnesses’ recruitment efforts extend beyond doorstep
  • Younger Muslims press for changing of the guard in American Islamic activism, advocacy
  • Emerging evangelical leaders take on broad agenda
  • Featured Story: Vitality still marks old and new Pentecostal denominations

Search the Site

Download the first issue of RELIGION WATCH (1980)

Download the first issue of RELIGION WATCH (1980)

Click on the image for downloading

© 2016-2023 Richard Cimino / Religioscope
·News Pro Theme · Genesis Framework by StudioPress · WordPress