How did Wikipedia hold up during the first year of the Russia-Ukraine War – a conflict that has been rife with information warfare? A new study by University of Michigan School of Information researchers says it did pretty well. The crowd-sourced, online encyclopedia managed to create and maintain fairly high-quality articles on the war. The researchers also explore how Wikipedia can serve as an effective content moderation model for social media platforms. 

The paper, “Wikipedia in Wartime: Experiences of Wikipedians Maintaining Articles About the Russia-Ukraine War” studies the impact of the Russia-Ukraine War on Wikipedia. Written by UMSI PhD student Laura Kurek, associate professor Ceren Budak and professor Eric Gilbert the paper asks what happens “when Wikipedia encounters an ongoing, evolving geopolitical conflict.” 

“In the context of the Russia-Ukraine War, this question becomes even more intriguing,” the paper states. “The Russian government has a long history of spreading disinformation and conducting information operations, extending back into the Soviet era.” 

Through interviews with 13 expert Wikipedians involved in the Russia-Ukraine War topic area on the English-language edition of Wikipedia, researchers sought to better understand the disruption from both Russia-aligned and Ukraine-aligned editors, how editors managed moderation and whether state-operatives were involved. 

“Wikipedia is a source of information and arguably something that people turn to as an authoritative source online,” Kurek says. “There is, perhaps, more interest and urgency that this data source is upheld and not corrupted.” 

The researchers found that while disruption occurred from both Russia-aligned and Ukraine-aligned accounts, the Wikipedia editors did not perceive there to be evidence of any state-backed information campaign in the Russia-Ukraine War topic area. 

The researchers also found that English-language Wikipedia had policies in place to protect against disruptive activity, and editors employed some of the strictest protections. These include limiting who could edit articles related to the Russian-Ukraine War and moderating talk page discussions. These protections were not, however, iron-clad: peripheral articles which received less attention from editors were more vulnerable to disruption. Biased or false information placed in the peripheral articles often took longer to identify and remove. 

Though Wikipedia is not social media, the paper asks: Perhaps social media could be more like Wikipedia?

“Some of the most intensive editing restrictions were employed to maintain information integrity on the Russo-Ukrainian War articles,” the paper states. “Wikipedia is an attractive target for information operations, but unlike social media, Wikipedia appears to be adept at preventing false or misleading information from entering its articles.” 

Kurek, a third-year PhD student, has a background in social media analysis and international affairs. Before joining UMSI, Kurek worked for several years in industry as a data science specialist and completed her Bachelor of Science in Science, Technology and International Affairs at Georgetown University. 

Beyond this paper, Kurek hopes to use her time at UMSI to continue studying how state actors attempt to manipulate online spaces.

RELATED

Learn more about Laura Kurek, Ceren Budak and Eric Gilbert by visiting their UMSI profiles. 

Keep up with research from UMSI experts by subscribing to our free research roundup newsletter!