World
Check mates: Unpaid editors are Wikipedia's bedrock

Check mates: Unpaid editors are Wikipedia's bedrock

A site to behold

In the words of Michael Scott: “Wikipedia is the best thing ever. Anyone in the world can write anything they want about any subject, so you know you are getting the best possible information”. And, in some ways, Scott isn’t wrong. Wikipedia’s open-access format has seen it become the 7th most popular site in the world, with English language Wikipedia alone counting some ~6.7 million articles in its library.

Wikipedia had humble beginnings. In 2001, on a day now known as Wikipedia Day, the site's first edit was posted: a homepage stating "This is the new WikiPedia!". Since then, it's been these edits, provided by a surprisingly small active user base, that have given life to the platform — arguably the largest collaborative knowledge project in human history.

Check mates

Indeed, despite Wikipedia’s hundreds of millions of users, just ~122,500 have edited pages in the last month, and, of these “Wikipedians”, a mere 881 admins wield the ultimate power to block, delete, and edit protected content. This means that startlingly few actually add anything to the site: if you make 1 edit, you rank in the top 30% of all Wikipedia users; if you make 10, you’re in the top 5%.

But, if you’re serious about becoming a “super editor”, you have a long way to catch up. Wiki’s golden boy, Steven Pruitt — or, as he’s known on the site, Ser Amantio di Nicolao — has made a mind-boggling 5.7 million edits, more than a typical month of edits on the entire site (last month saw ~4.7 million).

Named one of TIME’s most influential people online in 2017, Pruitt’s impact on the site stretches over one-third of all English language articles, as well as contributing articles on influential women to help correct Wikipedia’s gender imbalance — a project slightly more important than another user, who has single-handedly changed the term “comprised of47,000+ times.

Citation needed

The community of volunteer editors that Wikipedia’s vast pages rely on distinguishes it online — where else can you read about tautological place names, the colors of noise, or one 18th century soldier’s insatiable appetite, simply because someone possessed the time and interest to write it up? Even so, both Wikipedia’s beauty and unreliability stem from the fact that anyone can write anything — one example came in 2014, when Wiki banned IP addresses from the House of Representatives after several anonymous changes were made on politicians’ entries by computers within Capitol Hill.

More World

See all World
world
Tom Jones

The most watched soccer match in US history got less than a third of the views the Super Bowl did

Between a top-spot finish in the group stage, a sweeping performance against Bosnia and Herzegovina in the round of 32, and the president’s controversial intervention, Monday evening’s USMNT game against Belgium had, to put it lightly, shaped up into a box-office clash.

And though the US players’ performance on the pitch might not have lived up to the high drama off it, American soccer fans certainly showed up. According to early estimates, the 4-1 defeat against Belgium was the most watched soccer telecast in US history, hauling some 40 million viewers on average across the coverage on Fox and Telemundo.

That may be a record tally in the US for the sport that much of the world calls some variant of “football” — besting the 36.2 million who tuned in to watch the team’s previous knock-out match — but it’s still peanuts in comparison to the sport that shares the same name in the States.

World cup viewers chart
Sherwood News
Reddit alien stock exchange

Reddit’s advertising business is getting bigger. It’s already booming.

The platform will plow more money into its ad offerings as it cements itself as a “trove of human intelligence.”

Tom Jones6/22/26

Latest Stories

Sherwood Media, LLC and Chartr Limited produce fresh and unique perspectives on topical financial news and are fully owned subsidiaries of Robinhood Markets, Inc., and any views expressed here do not necessarily reflect the views of any other Robinhood affiliate, including Robinhood Markets, Inc., Robinhood Financial LLC, Robinhood Securities, LLC, Robinhood Crypto, LLC, Robinhood Money, LLC, Robinhood U.K. Ltd, Robinhood Derivatives, LLC, Robinhood Gold, LLC, Robinhood Asset Management, LLC, Robinhood Credit, Inc., Robinhood Ventures DE, LLC and, where applicable, its managed investment vehicles.