1.
Transparency Camp 2009 William Beutler Government + Wikipedia: The Good, The Bad & The Ugly Innovation Manager, Public Affairs

2.
What Wikipedia really is <ul><li>The happy go-lucky PR speak: </li></ul><ul><li>“ the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit.” </li></ul><ul><li>The behind-the-scenes description: </li></ul><ul><li>“ a neutral and unbiased compilation of </li></ul><ul><li>previously written, verifiable facts.” </li></ul><ul><li>A more realistic view: </li></ul><ul><li>an often useful but frequently </li></ul><ul><li>complicated and sometimes </li></ul><ul><li>unreliable place to start </li></ul><ul><li>doing research. </li></ul>Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

3.
Wikipedia is the most important reference site in the world Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

4.
Oh noes! You’ve been caught! Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

5.
WikiScanner: An important tool, but offers no conclusions Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

6.
The dogma vs. the guidelines <ul><li>“ A dogma has developed … that suggests it is inappropriate for anyone to write about themselves or anything they are personally involved with … the presumption seems to be that if an original source adds something to a Wikipedia entry, it must be false or spun or have some hidden agenda.” </li></ul><ul><li>– Blogger and consultant Rex Hammock, January 2007 </li></ul>“ [F]or every dodgy [edit] there are many, many more uncontroversial edits where people at the BBC have added information or changed a detail in good faith. The scanner also shows the same kind of results for a wide variety of other media organisations.“ – BBC's Head of Interactive News, Pete Clifton, August 2007 Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

7.
The Good, The Bad & The Ugly Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

8.
Going about it the wrong way <ul><li>Former Rep. Gil Gutknecht gets off on the right foot… </li></ul>Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

9.
Going about it the wrong way <ul><li>… but somewhere along the line, it all goes wrong big-time. </li></ul>Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

10.
Or the really wrong way <ul><li>Virginia Delegate Dave Albo won’t take “stop” for an answer… </li></ul>Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

11.
On the bubble <ul><li>Former Rep. Marty Meehan was pretty close: </li></ul>Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

12.
A better way to go about it <ul><li>Written by campaign volunteer, with relationship disclosed </li></ul>Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

13.
Getting Started Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

14.
Create a [[WP:ACCOUNT]] for crying out loud <ul><li>“ If you are not logged in, all your edits are publicly associated with your IP address at the time of that edit.” </li></ul>According to WikiScanner creator Virgil Griffith, 21% of Wikipedia edits are anonymous Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

15.
Mixed signals in the [[WP:COI]] guideline? <ul><li>“ Editing in the interests of public relations is particularly frowned upon. This includes, but is not limited to, edits made by public relations departments of corporations or governmental entities … with the sole intent of improving that organization's image.” </li></ul><ul><li>Compare To </li></ul><ul><li>“ Who has written the material should be irrelevant so long as these policies are closely adhered to.” </li></ul>Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

16.
Learn the [[WP:COI]] facts <ul><li>“ Where advancing outside interests is more important to an editor than advancing the aims of Wikipedia, that editor stands in a conflict of interest.” </li></ul><ul><li>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest </li></ul>Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

17.
Learn the policies and guidelines Approx. 50 mandatory policies, 150 pretty mandatory guidelines Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

18.
<ul><li>No Original Research: Have citations for everything – or it probably won’t stick. </li></ul><ul><li>Verifiability: Those citations must be high quality – no blogs (usually). </li></ul><ul><li>Neutral Point of View: No press release language or marketing-speak allowed. </li></ul>Start with the three primary content rules Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

19.
Non-controversial edits you can always make <ul><li>Removing spam and reverting vandalism . </li></ul><ul><li>Deleting content that violates Wikipedia's biography of living persons policy. </li></ul><ul><li>Fixing spelling and grammar errors. </li></ul><ul><li>Reverting or removing their own COI edits. Cleaning up your own mess is allowed and encouraged. </li></ul><ul><li>Making edits that have been agreed to on the talk page . </li></ul>Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

20.
But you can encourage controversial edits <ul><li>“ Those who feel the need to make controversial edits, in spite of a real or perceived conflict of interest, are strongly encouraged to submit proposed edits for review on the article's talk page along with a {{Request edit}} tag to attract users to review the edit.” </li></ul>{{Request edit}} (should get you the attention you need) Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

21.
Transparency Tools Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

22.
WikiRage and Popular Pages shows most edits, page views <ul><li>http://www.wikirage.com/ </li></ul><ul><li>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Popular_pages </li></ul>Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

23.
WikiDashboard shows an article’s top editors and patterns <ul><li>http://tinyurl.com/wikidashboard </li></ul>Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

24.
Edit Counter analyzes history of a single account <ul><li>http://tinyurl.com/soxrededitcounter </li></ul><ul><li>Also try: Interiot’s “Wannabe Kate” </li></ul>Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

25.
WikiBlame tells who added – or removed – a given phrase <ul><li>http://tinyurl.com/wikiblame </li></ul>Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

26.
The Future: Wikitrust, APIs, and who knows what else? <ul><li>http://tinyurl.com/wikitrust </li></ul>Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

27.
Guess who’s still editing Wikipedia? <ul><li>IP “user” 143.231.249.141 – aka the U.S. House of Representatives -- is more active than most Wikipedians: </li></ul>Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion

28.
Thank You! Questions? <ul><li>Contact info: </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Wikipedia: User:WWB & User:NMS_Bill </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Twitter: @williambeutler </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Blog P.I.: http://blogpi.net </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>The Wikipedian: http:// thewikipedian.net </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>E-mail: [email_address] </li></ul></ul></ul>Intro > Good, Bad, Ugly > Getting Started > Transparency Tools > Conclusion