A few years earlier in 2006, the administrators of the top website made potential efforts to cut down vandalism and hence reinforce the website's commitment to accuracy. In discussion with the New York Times, Jimmy Wales revealed that the wiki community would give priority to the quality of articles over a total quantity. In the present time, the website is based on artificial intelligence in the forms of bots to differentiate between the website vandalism and the factual changes made to the articles.
Aaron halfaker a part of the Wikimedia foundation told that after 2016 the article published in Wikipedia volunteers are more cautiously checked and analyzed with more efforts particularly from the new users.
Aaron Halfaker from the Wikimedia Foundation told Cade Metz of Wired in an article published in 2016 that, after that switch, Wikipedia volunteers fact-checked and analyzed reports with more significant effort and became more cautious of new users.
However as Metz states;
Since the website administrators made efforts to keep up with quality, they crafted an environment that steered to the continuous declines in the size of the Wikipedia volunteer community. Ultimately the sarcasm is that as lesser and lesser people make edits on Wikipedia, there runs the risk of a smaller number of people bending the reality to uniform their particular opinions and attitudes and motivation.
Moreover, in efforts to combat the tides of fake news, jimmy wales come up with wiki tribune that is the new media enterprise acting as the hybrid, combining the open Wikipedia community with the traditional news media. The news has been spread, Wales claimed in his introduction to wiki tribune's launch in 2017. However, we have figured out how to fix it. A couple of years later the wiki tribune came into running however a structure that stands out from highly traditional digital media outlets. On the homepage, the wiki tribune determined its identity as the news platform organized to spread the neutral factual and high-end news for the website slogan says it all to come and collaborate with us since facts do matter.
However, similar to Wikipedia, the wiki tribune any volunteer can make contributions to the current articles or add a new article or even edit the current articles on the website in real time. Either it's a story on the political instability or a piece of fact-checking a political statement. Hence it has been pointed out by many Wikipedia editor service for more than decades ago that how much is the actual value if any person has the power to reveal what is the truth and what is not
A review of the structure of Wikipedia
In spite of the new efforts to emphasize the accuracy the Wikipedia's policies for evaluating the source information are not free of flaws. Rosie Stephenson who has been an active editor and contributor on Wikipedia since 2015 says one of the websites most significant flaws is that the contributor and the editor community keeps up with following the guidelines on the reliable sources that has been written decades earlier. The question is any information reliable two decades earlier is still worthy of contribution, and the answer is a definite no for its not appropriate at all.
As per Rosie, she has composed more than 5000 articles for the website to this far, and she also claims that if you continue to follow the rules laid in the era more than 20 years ago in the recent days, there will be a significant impact on the article the website make publications in the very first place
Hence it can be concluded that the practice is biased and if we continue to live with what is biased we will have a very edgy encyclopedia that will neglect things that are in other case considered notable. Stephenson argues that Wikipedia's old policies have already influenced the types of articles that have been published: women are not given equal opportunity to sole coverage. Hence if someone had been a writer, scientist, artist, and women 150 years ago in the 19 century, she needs to be extraordinary to get a mention:
Comparatively, Stephenson claims that contributors and editors need to work harder and take a look for more sources to be put together about a woman. We need to find several references to compose an article to mention women than to praise a man, it’s easy since there will be so much written for the men and not much for the women.