Delhi high court count flags Wikipedia model as dangerous.

The Delhi high court has raised a concern about the potential dangers of using Wikipedia as a source of information.

Introduction

The Delhi high court has flagged a serious concern for the users of Wikipedia.

Wikipedia is widely used for information from all over the world. Is now questionable.

The first edit to Wikipedia was made on January 15, 2001, two days after the domain was registered. Wikipedia’s policy of “neutral point-of-view” was established in its first few months.

Wikipedia was created in 2001 by Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger as a way to make it easier to write and translate articles for Expedia, a more structured encyclopedia. The name “Wikipedia” is a combination of the words “wiki” and “encyclopedia”.

Wikipedia is overseen by the nonprofit Wikimedia Foundation and uses a collaborative software called a wiki.

The court hearing

The Delhi high court has flagged Wikipedia’s model as “dangerous” and cautioned against relying solely on it for research or decision-making. The court’s concerns stem from the fact that Wikipedia is a user-generated encyclopedia, meaning that its content is created and edited by volunteers. This can lead to inaccuracies, biases, and even vandalism. Additionally, Wikipedia does not have a fact-checking process, so there is no guarantee that the information it contains is accurate.

“Anyone can edit a page on Wikipedia”

what kind of page is this if it open to anybody (for editing ): The court asked with surprise.

“Assume it is my name anybody can abuse me on my page or give false information regarding me or attribute statement” – Justice Subramonium Prasad .

^{Justice Subramonium Prasad}

However, Wikipedia’s counsel senior advocate Jayant Mehta submitted that users have to comply with the while creating the page or updating information.

Wikipedia maintained that users are required to comply with its policies.

“Let’s begin at step zero. It is not like Facebook. It is not social media where you have a page
and anybody can do anything. It is an encyclopedia where any user can add information if its
worthy. The page is open to editing by anybody and that is how it gains credibility. Every
information is required to be cross-reference to source,” Mehta said.

The Delhi high court has urged people to be cautious when using Wikipedia and to verify the information
they find there from other sources. It has also suggested that courts and other institutions
should be aware of the limitations of Wikipedia and should not rely on it as the sole source of
information.
The Delhi high Court’s warning is a timely reminder that it is important to be critical of the
information we find online. Wikipedia can be a valuable resource, but it should not be used
blindly. It is important to verify the information from other sources before relying on it.

Wikipedia’s Open Model: A Double-Edged Sword

Wikipedia, the world’s largest online encyclopedia, operates on a unique model that allows anyone to edit its content. This open-source approach has both advantages and disadvantages.

Advantages of Wikipedia’s Open Model:

• Community-Driven Knowledge: The collaborative nature of Wikipedia allows for a diverse range of perspectives and contributions from experts and enthusiasts alike.
• Transparency and Accountability: Edits are visible and can be reviewed and corrected by other users, fostering a sense of transparency and accountability.
• Constant Updates: The open editing model enables rapid updates to information, ensuring that the encyclopedia remains current and relevant.

Disadvantages of Wikipedia’s Open Model:

• Potential for Misinformation: The open nature of the platform can lead to the introduction of false or misleading information, especially if it goes unnoticed or is difficult to verify.
• Risk of Vandalism and Bias: Malicious users can deliberately introduce inaccurate or biased information, or simply vandalize articles.
• Lack of Editorial Oversight: While there are administrators and guidelines in place, Wikipedia relies heavily on self-regulation by the community, which can sometimes be insufficient.

The Legal Implications

The case mentioned in the prompt raises important questions about the legal liability of platforms like Wikipedia for user-generated content. While Wikipedia has measures in place to mitigate risks, the potential for harm, such as defamation, cannot be entirely eliminated.

As the internet continues to evolve, so too will the legal landscape surrounding online platforms. It is essential to strike a balance between promoting free speech and ensuring accountability for harmful content.

ANI had filed a defamation lawsuit against Wikipedia on July 9, asking for Rs. 2 crore in damages. On August 20, the court had ordered Wikipedia to disclose the identities of the users who made the edits. Wikipedia subsequently appealed against the order to the Division Bench, which was notified of another Wikipedia page detailing the hearing. The court ordered the website to take down this page within 72 hours, and filed a contempt of court case when it failed to do so. Wikipedia eventually did take down the page, following which the contempt order was scrapped.

Conclusion

ANI also submitted that the page is continuously changing and further defamatory edits have
been made.

Mehta submitted ANI has a very wrong understanding of Wikipedia’s architecture. He added
that a note would be submitted on how Wikipedia functions.
“The references in the Wikipedia article have been in the public domain for a number of years. It
is not as simple as my friend put its,” the senior counsel said.

After brief submissions, the matter was adjourned to October 28 after the Court found that the
reply filed by Wikipedia was not on record before it.

The Delhi high court also directed the parties to submit a short note by this evening.