Help:Misinformation
This page documents how misinformation – false information as well as misleading or partially flawed information – can and is mitigated in Wikimedia projects insofar it relates to Wikimedia Commons. It serves as a place to organize or discuss related subjects.
Media lacking sources
[edit]WMC contributors add the template {{Datasource missing}} to the files which shows on the file description page as a warning. It also adds the file to Category:Information graphics without data source.
If such warnings about missing sources is not displayed elsewhere that is a partly technical problem.
Files (datagraphics) without data sources that are used on Wikipedia or other Wikimedia projects can be found using the GLAMorgan tool here (alternative tool). Editors could replace these uses or ask the uploaders to provide datasources (with used files being prioritized) or find, validate, and add the identified datasources themselves. For many files there is no datasource available but the file is still very useful and is adequate to be used at least until something better exists – this is especially the case for maps which are often created collaboratively by many users.
Media containing misinformation
[edit]WMC contributors add the template {{Factual accuracy}} to the files which shows on the file description page as a warning. Users can specify what the issues or disputes with the file contents are in the |2= parameter and should at least include clear explanations and if possible supporting sources. It also adds the file to Category:File accuracy disputes which also has several subcategories of disputed files.
If such warnings about missing sources is not displayed elsewhere that is a partly technical problem.
There are many files with misinformation on Wikimedia Commons but unlike other websites like YouTube, contributors can – and are supposed to – mark them to contain such in well-visible ways. For example, many files in Category:Homeopathy, Category:Videos of religion, Category:Advertising videos, Category:Videos by Modern-Day Debate, or Category:Videos of pseudoscience contain malinformation or misinformation. However, these may still be due here and good to keep, for example to document beliefs and notable opinions of people or something else that is notable or otherwise due here. No file is somehow immune from being tagged with this template if it does contain misinformation.
Files that accurately document people's views or beliefs are not "misinformation" merely because others don't share this view or belief. Be aware of Common's Neutral point of view policy differing notably from English Wikipedia's.
Be aware the label "misinformation" is sometimes used by governments to pressure websites into censoring information and points of views that differ from their opinion or current policy.
Files with misinformation or otherwise disputed contents (checking on a per case basis is necessary) that are used on Wikipedia or other Wikimedia projects can be found using the GLAMorgan tool here (this is expected to work after some data update – one could use this instead). Editors could replace these uses or ask on the page's talk page about the file use or make sure it's adequately contextualized.
Inaccurate file titles or descriptions
[edit]Contributors can move files: see Commons:File renaming. Uploaders are however expected to properly name their files – see Commons:File naming.
They can also add {{Fact disputed}} to files where the description (or filename) does not seem to match the content.
Files and categories can also be incorrectly categorized which other contributors can correct.
Users may also edit descriptions to introduce misinformation. Since no automatic detection and reverting exists on Commons, where Wikipedia has e.g. ClueBot and usually more page watchers, this can be problematic. See mw:Moderator Tools/Automoderator
Tracking of new file versions
[edit]Contributors can easily upload a new version of a file which replaces the file at all pages where it is us. See Commons:Overwriting existing files. This can be difficult to track and check. Other contributors who have the file on their Watchlist may notice somebody uploaded a new version and may check it but no organized effort for such seems to exist. For example, users uploaded new versions of File:Asia homosexuality laws.svg with misleading info that China has an explicit anti-LGBT law and that Armenia recognizes same-sex marriages in July 2017 which was corrected in September 2024.
Mitigating external misinformation using Wikimedia projects
[edit]
There is a related subject of how misinformation in the external world could be mitigated using Wikimedia. One way is trying to simply ensure Wikimedia projects, especially the most used project Wikipedia, are and remain free of misinformation and inaccuracies or outdated information so people can go there and find neutral useful relatively reliable comprehensive information on the subject they think about. Other potential ways can be listed below:
- Bots could provide people a link to the relevant Wikipedia article section when they post misinformation so they can read up on it (problems: it can intensify their false beliefs and attract a large number of people to these sections which they could sometimes eventually introduce misinformation) – see e.g. Category:Computer-assisted classification of claims and arguments.
- Citation needed has become a cultural phenomenon and the Wikimedia approach(es) have some presence in modern society and thinking, offering people to notice an alternative approach to political marketing and opinion bubbles where many viewpoints are integrated and explained in neutral ways (ideally but with few exceptions also quite successfully).
- Videos can be created based on Wikipedia contents to distribute its information and approach more widely.
- Good-quality educational videos on Wikimedia Commons can be translated to other versions – see e.g. Category:Videos by Terra X by language of dubbed video
- The Citation Needed experimental browser extension uses Wikipedia to verify claims and shows useful information for that for highlighted statements anywhere on the Web
- Wikimedia projects and organizations could play a role in increasing digital literacy and media literacy – the number of people increasing such by contributing to Wikimedia projects is too low to have any measurable impact but schools could introduce digital literacy training in curricula – see Category:Media literacy and Category:Wikimedia projects and education.
- There is the List of common misconceptions and articles like that or sections about controversies or controversial subjects could also be turned into videos or be linked at relevant places.
- …
Further information
[edit]- {{Disputed chem}} – for inaccurate chemical structures
- {{Disputed coat of arms}} – for coat of arms where the correctness or accuracy is disputed
- {{Disputed diagram}} – for diagrams where the factual correctness or accuracy is disputed
- {{Inaccurate-map-disputed}} – for maps where the factual correctness or accuracy is disputed
- {{Inaccurate paleoart}} for paleontological restorations (it adds Category:Inaccurate paleoart)
- {{Implausible}} – an in-line template − suspicious, very likely false information about the author, date of creation, license, etc.