The Signpost


In the media

Shocking photos may be changed on Wikipedia

Contribute   —  
Share this
By Bri, Czarking0, and Mitchsavl

We all wear a mask

[edit]
TKTK
The updated photo from 1977.

A person is more affected by something that’s on their Wikipedia page more than a news article in, I don’t know, CNN or New York Times.—Anna Delvey 2026 [1]

Delvey feels that her biography is too focused on her past rather than who she currently is. User:Theannadelvey's past attempts to change the page have sometimes proven successful. For example, she used the WP:EDITCOI process to correct biographical details about moving to Germany. However, she has unsuccessfully discussed the desire to change her article's infobox photo.

In the wake of Dolly Parton's death, editors updated Parton's infobox photo from a color 2014 image to a black and white 1977 shot.[2] There does not appear to be a broad policy for selecting an image. The only CAPS visible in the discussion which yielded the change was WP:RECENTISM. Consensus for the selected photo was based on it depicting her in her prime.

TKTK
Photo of Dolly Parton displayed in the infobox prior to her death.

Delvey stated that she first became familiar with Wikipedia's editing policies after learning of Larry Sanger's ban. She described them as "byzantine".[3] Delvey's frustrations have culminated in her sentiment that editors should not be anonymous. In her funny and critical substack, she did change User:Darknipples' username to protect their identity.[4] She goes on to quote Hannah Arendt, "Without the disclosure of the agent in the act, action loses its specific character and becomes one form of achievement among others… Action without a name, a ‘who’ attached to it, is meaningless."

Aaron Shaw, an associate professor of Communication and Sociology at Northwestern University interviewed by Straight Arrow News, agreed with Delvey's critique of Wikipedia's rules and stated "unbelievably profuse and hard to read, especially if you're an outsider and really challenging to navigate effectively, even for people who have spent a lot of time trying to figure them out."[1] However, he stated that anonymity is important to the democratic, volunteer project. – C

AI overruns German wiki site

[edit]
TKTK
The AIs are coming to get you... no, really.

Beginning in May this year, a rogue swarm of AI agents took over Deutsches-Software-Entwickler-Wiki (DseWiki), a primarily German language wiki site used as a software developers' message board founded in 2001. The agents' discussion included topics such as how to avoid detection and how to cheat in model testing.[5][6]

As described in a detailed report[6] by the researchers who uncovered the incident (months after it happened), the agents (which self-identified as being from OpenAI) had a particular reason for resorting to this wiki: Their developers blocked them from using POST requests, which are the usual method for a user to publish content on the web. However:

You can easily write to DSEWiki [...] using only GET requests (something rare on the internet). GET requests are a type of message meant to retrieve data from a server, and by convention they shouldn’t change the server’s state.
In order to prevent agents from editing the internet, environment developers only allowed GET requests to be sent out.

ProWiki, the Austrian wiki hosting service used by DSEWiki, is based on the venerable UseModWiki,[7] which dates back to 1999 and was also used by Wikipedia when it launched in 2001, before switching to MediaWiki, whose developers disabled editing via GET back in 2002 already. (Rollback links remain a small exception today - however, these are restricted to users with particular rights.) Some other wikis on ProWiki were also affected, to a lesser extent. The researchers' website offers a data explorer allowing to browse through almost 15000 preserved agent edits.

Another unusual feature of UseModWiki is that it logs all visitor IPs publicly (in stark contrast to, say, Wikimedia's privacy policy today). This let the researchers conclude that likely "OpenAI discovered the message board", based on visits with OpenAI employee IP addresses in the log. Shortly after these, "Agent activity on the website drop[ped] to near-zero" - however, it resumed several days later and only ended weeks afterwards.[6]

The report comes several months after a (self-disclosed) AI agent was banned from Wikipedia in March for making autonomous edits to the site, against bot policy.[8]

This adds to a growing list of AI agent-related incidents such as the Hugging Face incident.[9] However, the researchers who uncovered the Dsewiki incident assess that "[t]his was probably a distinct swarm from the swarm that [...] attacked Hugging Face".[6]M, H

Wikipedia withers when Google's ginormous gisting AI eats eyeballs

[edit]
TKTK
New media channels change patterns of attention.
More on the academic paper mentioned here can be found in the Recent research section of this issue of The Signpost.

Search Engine Journal reports on University of Washington research showing a drop in Wikipedia pageviews. Bottom line of the research is a 5% drop due to Google AI overview, the summaries that many Google users read then never click further. The paper is not yet peer reviewed, and uses some novel analysis of traffic differentials from geographic areas that did and did not have the preview feature turned on, during Google's 2024 rollout. Another tidbit from Search Engine Journal: If Wikipedia were fully monetized, the drop would have been reflected by a loss of up to nearly $40 million per year in ad revenue to the operators. This would appear at least on its face to contradict our 2025 reporting "Wikipedia probably not among the victims of Google's 'AI Overviews'". – B

In brief

[edit]
Pageviews for the article Human penis stood erect around the time of the podcast, probably due to "conscientious overthinkers".

References

[edit]
  1. ^ a b Thomas, Rosie (Aug 18, 2026). "Anna Delvey's crusade against Wikipedia, and what it means for the First Amendment". Straight Arrow News.
  2. ^ Zion, Rison. "Dolly Parton's Wikipedia Photo Changed Overnight—and Fans Think They Know Why". Jubilee Cast.
  3. ^ Thomas, Rosie (July 27, 2026). "Should Anna Delvey be allowed to edit her own Wikipedia page?". Straight Arrow.
  4. ^ Delvey, Anna (24 July 2026). "YOUR REQUEST HAS BEEN DENIED (Part I)". Anna Delvey.
  5. ^ Multiple news sources:
  6. ^ a b c d Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board on collusion.wiki
  7. ^ Jessica Ruan: ⭒ A Few of Us Investigated OpenAI's Agent Traffic on an Austrian/German Wiki
  8. ^ Multiple sources:
  9. ^ Multiple sources:
  10. ^ CARSON, ALEX (26 August 2026). "Dolly Parton's Wikipedia page vandalized with antisemitic content, swastika". The Jerusalem Post.
  11. ^ Dahlkamp, Owen (September 2, 2026). "Trump's Lake America push forces tech to pick a side". POLITICO.
  12. ^ "Così Vannacci preparava la sua ascesa politica su Wikipedia".



Do you want to contribute to "In the media" by writing a story or even just an "in brief" item? Edit our next edition in the Newsroom or leave a tip on the suggestions page.

This page is a draft for the next issue of the Signpost. Below is some helpful code that will help you write and format a Signpost draft. If it's blank, you can fill out a template by copy-pasting this in and pressing 'publish changes': {{subst:Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Story-preload}}


Signpost
In this issue
+ Add a comment

Discuss this story

To follow comments, add the page to your watchlist. If your comment has not appeared here, you can try purging the cache.
No comments yet. Yours could be the first!







       

The Signpost · written by many · served by Sinepost V0.9 · 🄯 CC-BY-SA 4.0