According to foreign media goodwordnews, 20 years ago, Wikipedia emerged as an original online project. The platform aims to collect and record all human knowledge and history in real time. But skeptics fear that much of the website’s information is unreliable and often reports errors.
But now, online encyclopedias are often cited as a place that generally helps combat false and misleading information spread elsewhere.
Last week, Wikimedia Foundation (Wikimedia Foundation), which oversees Wikipedia, announced the news that South African social entrepreneur Maryana Iskander joined the organization. Iskander has worked in nonprofit organizations for many years and is committed to addressing young people’s unemployment and youth rights. She will take up the position of general manager in January next year.
Foreign media goodwordnews interviewed her during an interview with her during the period and learned about her vision for the organization and how the organization worked to prevent false and misleading information on its website and the Internet.
Goodwordnews: Please tell us your direction and vision for wikimedia , especially in such a busy news environment and a polarized world.
Maryana Iskander: Wiki media project has some foundations - including Wikipedia - I think it is an important starting point. It is an online encyclopedia. It's not trying to be something else. It certainly doesn't want to be a traditional social media platform in any way. It has a structure run by volunteer edits. As you may know, the foundation does not have editorial rights. A large part of this is a user-driven community, and we support and activate it.
The lessons we want to learn not only come from what we do but also how we continue to iterate and improve, all start with the idea of thorough transparency. Everything on Wikipedia is quoted. This is discussed on our discussion page. So even if people may have different perspectives, these debates are open and transparent, and in some cases do allow the right back and forth. I think that's what you need in such a polarized society - you have to make room for polarization. But how do you do these jobs transparently and ultimately lead to better products and better information?
Finally, I want to say that people in this community are very modest and honest. Going forward, how do we leverage these features to make this platform continue to provide society with what and provide free access to knowledge? How do we ensure that we achieve a comprehensive diversity of humanity, in terms of who is invited to participate and who is reported? How can we really ensure that our collective efforts better reflect reality, more reflect the Southern Hemisphere, more reflect women, and more reflect the diversity of human knowledge?
Goodwordnews: How do you view Wikipedia's position in the problem of the flood of online disinformation?
Maryana Iskander: Many basic attributes of the platform are very different from some traditional social media platforms. If you consider false information about COVID-19 , the Wikimedia Foundation is already working with World Health Organization . A group of volunteers gathered around the so-called Wikimed project, which focused on the creation of medical content and articles, and then monitored it very carefully because these are topics about disinformation you want to remember.
Another example is that the Foundation set up a task force before the U.S. election and tried to take a proactive approach. The task force supported 56,000 volunteer editors and oversaw key election pages. The U.S. election homepage has only 33 flashbacks, and this is an example of how to focus on key topics where false information poses a real risk.
Another example I find cool is that there is a podcast called The World According to Wikipedia. In one of the episodes, there was a volunteer interviewed and she was truly one of the main observers of climate change.
We have the technology to remind edits whenever any page changes so they can see what changes have happened. If there is a risk of false information penetration, the page can be temporarily locked.No one wants to do this unless it is absolutely necessary. The example of climate change is useful because the discussion page behind it has a lot of debate. Our editor said "Let's start the debate. But this is a page I've looked at closely."
Goodwordnews: A big debate that is going on on these social media platforms is the issue of information censorship. Some say biased views on these platforms are preferred and more conservative views are suppressed. When you’re thinking about how to deal with these arguments, once you’re at the helm of Wikipedia, how do you make judgments based on what’s going on in the backstage?
Maryana Iskander: For me, the most inspiring thing about this organization and these communities is that Wikipedia has built some basic pillars on its first day of creation. One of them is to present information from a neutral perspective, which requires understanding all aspects and all perspectives.
This is what I said before: put the debate next to the discussion page and then draw an informed, documented and verifiable conclusion about these articles. I think this is a basic principle, which can provide some opportunities for others to learn.
Goodwordnews: You are from a progressive organization fighting for women’s rights. Have you ever thought about the false intelligenceists who militarized your past that said they would influence the decisions you made on Wikipedia?
Maryana Iskander: I want to say two things. I would say that in the work I’ve done in the past, the real relevant aspect is a volunteer-led movement, which is probably much harder than others think, and I play a real role. To understand how to build systems, create cultures and create processes, I believe these will be related to an organization and a group of communities that are trying to scale and reach.
The second thing I want to say is that I follow my own learning journey and I invite you guys to go on the learning journey with me. The way I choose in this world is that we interact with others on the assumption of integrity and conduct it with respect and civilization. This doesn't mean that others will do the same. But I think we have to take it as a desire, as a way, you know, to be the change we want to see in the world.
Goodwordnews: When I was in college, I did a lot of research on Wikipedia, and some of my professors would say, "You know, that's not a legitimate source. But I'm still using it all the time. I wonder what you think about it!
Maryana Iskander: I think most professors now admit that they'll sneak up on Wikipedia to find something!
You know, this year we're going to celebrate the 20th anniversary of Wikipedia. On the one hand, I think people will laugh at it and say it won't make any progress. Now, it's rightfully the most cited material in human history. From my conversations with scholars, I can tell you that the narrative about Wikipedia's source and use has changed.
