Reliable Sources: How Wikipedia Admin David Gerard Launders His Grudges Into the Public Record

🌈 Abstract

The article provides an in-depth look at the role and influence of Wikipedia administrator David Gerard, particularly his efforts to shape the site's content and policies around "reliable sources". It explores how Gerard has used his position and knowledge of Wikipedia processes to advance his personal biases and agendas, often in ways that undermine the site's principles of neutrality and objectivity.

🙋 Q&A

[01] Gerard's Role and Influence on Wikipedia

1. What is David Gerard's role and influence on Wikipedia?

• Gerard has been a Wikipedia administrator since 2004 and has edited the site over 200,000 times, making him one of the most prolific and influential editors.
• He has played a key role in shaping Wikipedia's policies around "reliable sources", aggressively removing content that cites sources he deems unreliable.
• He has used his position and knowledge of Wikipedia processes to advance his personal biases and agendas, often in ways that undermine the site's principles of neutrality and objectivity.

2. How does Gerard determine which sources are "reliable" on Wikipedia?

• Gerard has a strong preference for mainstream media sources and is highly skeptical of alternative or "heterodox" sources, even if they are well-researched.
• He has successfully pushed for the banning or deprecation of certain sources he deems unreliable, such as the Daily Mail and the Washington Free Beacon, while defending the reliability of sources like the Huffington Post and PinkNews despite evidence of journalistic misconduct.
• Gerard's determinations of reliability often seem to align with his own political and ideological leanings, rather than objective assessments of the sources' quality.

3. What are some examples of Gerard's biased treatment of sources on Wikipedia?

• He has dismissed well-regarded publications like Quillette and The Free Press as unreliable, while defending the reliability of outlets like the Huffington Post and PinkNews despite evidence of questionable journalism.
• He has aggressively removed citations to sources he deems unreliable, often with little consideration for the actual content or context of the information.
• He has used his position to shape the narratives around topics he is passionate about, such as effective altruism and the rationalist community, in ways that align with his personal biases.

[02] Gerard's Relationship with the Rationalist Community

1. How did Gerard's relationship with the rationalist community, particularly LessWrong, evolve over time?

• Gerard was initially an active participant on LessWrong, engaging in discussions and even defending the site at times.
• However, over time, he became increasingly critical and antagonistic towards the rationalist community, fixating on issues like Roko's Basilisk and perceived ties between rationalists and neoreactionaries.
• Gerard used his position on Wikipedia to shape the narrative around LessWrong, emphasizing the site's alleged connections to neoreaction and downplaying positive information.

2. What was the basis for Gerard's animosity towards the rationalist community?

• The article suggests that Gerard's animosity towards the rationalist community, particularly LessWrong, stemmed from a personal falling out or "breakup story" that is not fully explained.
• Gerard's fixation on issues like Roko's Basilisk and his efforts to associate rationalists with neoreactionaries appear to be driven by a deep-seated personal grudge, rather than objective assessments.

3. How did Gerard's actions on Wikipedia impact the rationalist community?

• Gerard's edits and actions on the LessWrong Wikipedia page significantly shaped the narrative around the site, emphasizing negative or controversial aspects and downplaying positive information.
• His persistent efforts to associate rationalists with neoreactionaries, despite a lack of evidence, have likely contributed to the public perception of the rationalist community.
• The article suggests that Gerard's actions on Wikipedia demonstrate the power of a motivated, knowledgeable editor to wield significant influence over the public's understanding of a topic, even if their motivations are personal rather than objective.