
Anonymous Wikipedia edits from the Norwegian parliament and government offices - jensen2k
https://files.jaribakken.no/wikiedits/no/en.html
======
kmfrk
Better to just link to the tool:
[https://github.com/edsu/anon](https://github.com/edsu/anon).

++

\- Denmark
([https://twitter.com/FTingetWikiEdit](https://twitter.com/FTingetWikiEdit))

\- Sweden
([https://twitter.com/RiksdagWikiEdit](https://twitter.com/RiksdagWikiEdit))

\- United States
([https://twitter.com/congressedits](https://twitter.com/congressedits))

\- Chile
([https://twitter.com/CongresoEdita](https://twitter.com/CongresoEdita))

\- United Kingdom
([https://twitter.com/parliamentedits](https://twitter.com/parliamentedits))

\- France
([https://twitter.com/wikiAssemblee](https://twitter.com/wikiAssemblee))

\- Canada ([https://twitter.com/gccaedits](https://twitter.com/gccaedits))

++

 _Local government:_

\- North Carolina
([https://twitter.com/NCGAedits](https://twitter.com/NCGAedits))

++

 _(To those wondering, no interesting edits so far.)_

~~~
x1798DE
Nice. They should probably modify the tool so that the links go to the https
version, not the http version.

~~~
saraid216
Sounds like a great thing to submit a pull request for.

------
lars
Interesting data, but I fail to see anything sinister going on here. Skimming
through the list, it looks like 90% of the articles fall into one of three
categories: Streets in Oslo, embassies in Oslo and people I mostly haven't
heard of (i.e. not politically controversial characters). I don't see any
edits intended to sway public opinion.

~~~
bagosm
Same here, my only worry is that maybe that's exactly the strategy they use to
blur the waters. On the other hand, propaganda can't be that forward, can it?

~~~
jessriedel
"Muddy the waters"? I think lines, not water, are blurred :)

~~~
evanb
It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to understand what was meant : )

~~~
mrpopo
"Rocket engineer"? I think surgeons work on bodies, not rockets :)

------
Kiro
It's phrased like this is some big evil scheme going on but looking at the
edits it's exactly the kind of stuff I believe the government should keep up
to date on Wikipedia.

~~~
catshirt
seemed to me like it was explicitly phrased so you WOULDN'T think that.

imagine the title (and source) if they were making controversial edits?

~~~
jessriedel
I think he's bothered by the vaguely sinister use of "anonymous". It's a true
adjective, of course, but not really worth including in the title unless
you're trying to imply something bad (and get page views).

~~~
catshirt
it being vague is the reason i concluded it _wasn 't_ part of a big evil
scheme.

if this was part of some "big evil scheme", the title would be far less
innocent. do you disagree?

so to say it is "phrased like this is some big evil scheme" seems
disingenuous. i try not to make assumptions, especially when it comes to
headlines and "news".

------
raziel2p
Looking through the first 20 or so, all I can find are added links, cross-
references and improved grammar. Someone's lunch pastime maybe :)

~~~
userbinator
I randomly scanned through the list and found the same thing, nothing
suspicious.

If the government was really determined to change history, you would think
they wouldn't be doing it from their own IP ranges...

~~~
guhcampos
The thing is we are conditioned to believe that anything the government does,
especially anonymously, is necessarily bad.

From what I've seem on the list, this has been some kind of an effort to
actually improve the arcticles, and update government related information,
like embassy addresses and websites.

It looks like there is a bunch of responsible, well intentioned and helpful
people in the government - at lealst in Norway.

~~~
skwirl
Are you Norwegian? Because my understanding is that Scandinavians tend to be
the most trusting of their governments and have the least corrupt and most
transparent governments (perhaps excluding Iceland). It would strike me as odd
to hear someone from Norway say they are conditioned to believe anything
government does is necessarily bad.

~~~
saraid216
Why excluding Iceland all the sudden? Iceland and Denmark have traditionally
been included in the Scandinavian "zomg bestest democracy!!" model.

~~~
skwirl
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitchenware_Revolution](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitchenware_Revolution)

------
waterlesscloud
There's a Twitter feed of wikipedia edits that originate from the US Congress
- [https://twitter.com/congressedits](https://twitter.com/congressedits)

My favorite is the edit of a congressman's bio from saying he used to be a
"corporate lawyer" to "attorney".

------
dbpokorny
Wikipedia is getting very awkward - it is clear that some articles are 100%
propaganda, while others appear to have honest insight into world events.

I guess it's good to break the habit of thinking that history (like AP US
History) can be read in an "unfiltered" way, but without something like a
comprehensive database of every single Wikipedia edit, with tools to help
detect bias (example: CIA wants to edit an article) Wikipedia will become a
victim in the information arms race.

In this particular case, I think statistics can reverse the obvious "tragedy
of the commons" situation with Wikipedia.

For example: tools to help with associating edits / edit conspiracy /
sockpuppet detection

------
jarib
What source of edits do you think would yield more interesting results?

------
JacobAldridge
This is one of those cases where the changed Title on HN misleads [1]. These
aren't changes from the 'government' they are changes from 'parliament and
government offices'. Occams Razor would suggest they are more likely to be
staffers and the occasional Patsy Cline-loving MP, rather than cabinet
policies being enacted.

[1] Title as I write is _" 10 years of anonymous Wikipedia edits from the
Norwegian government"_

~~~
acdha
That deliberately inflammatory wording also relies on the fact that some
people hear “government” and immediately thinking of intelligence agencies or
cynical political operators and ignore the fact that, particularly in well-
reputed free countries like Norway with extremely low corruption rates, there
are many government employees who feel a mandate for actual public service,
and are doing non-trivial research & analysis, etc. to make sure that
lawmakers and other parts of the government make the right decisions.

The kind of people you hire to do that sort of work are exactly the kind of
people who are going to update Wikipedia when they see something wrong or
incomplete — or possibly the person who might get a message if someone can't
find the right info on Wikipedia.

~~~
Amezarak
The same thing is true for the vast majority of the Wikipedia edits attributed
to the US Congress. Not only are most if not all of them written by staffers
and other government employees who almost certainly not receiving any
direction to make the edits, they're almost all innocuous spelling or grammar
edits and a large portion of them aren't even on political pages.

I don't know if I'd attribute it to public service so much as boredom and
personal hobbies, though. The headline, of course, is the same as in this case
- that "the government" is making Wikipedia edits, with malicious implications
- though there have at least been _some_ cases of vandalism, probably by
staffers.

~~~
acdha
public service might be too specific a term – it's really just a desire to
share or correct something you know about. People on HN are used to thinking
of e.g. [http://xkcd.com/386/](http://xkcd.com/386/) as a tech geek thing but
there are an awful lot of wonky types who feel that compulsion about other
fields.

