Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Wikipedia China The Internet

A Bored Chinese Housewife Spent Years Falsifying Russian History On Wikipedia (vice.com) 106

An anonymous reader writes: Posing as a scholar, a Chinese woman spent years writing alternative accounts of medieval Russian history on Chinese Wikipedia, conjuring imaginary states, battles, and aristocrats in one of the largest hoaxes on the open-source platform. The scam was exposed last month by Chinese novelist Yifan, who was researching for a book when he came upon an article on the Kashin silver mine. Discovered by Russian peasants in 1344, the Wikipedia entry goes, the mine engaged more than 40,000 slaves and freedmen, providing a remarkable source of wealth for the Russian principality of Tver in the 14th and 15th centuries as well as subsequent regimes. The geological composition of the soil, the structure of the mine, and even the refining process were fleshed out in detail in the entry.

Yifan thought he'd found interesting material for a novel. Little did he know he'd stumbled upon an entire fictitious world constructed by a user known as Zhemao. It was one of 206 articles she has written on Chinese Wikipedia since 2019, weaving facts into fiction in an elaborate scheme that went uncaught for years and tested the limits of crowdsourced platforms' ability to verify information and fend off bad actors. "The content she wrote is of high quality and the entries were interconnected, creating a system that can exist on its own," veteran Chinese Wikipedian John Yip told VICE World News. "Zhemao single-handedly invented a new way to undermine Wikipedia."

Yifan was tipped off when he ran the silver mine story by Russian speakers and fact-checked Zhemao's references, only to find that the pages or versions of the books she cited did not exist. People he consulted also called out her lengthy entries on ancient conflicts between Slavic states, which could not be found in Russian historical records. "They were so rich in details they put English and Russian Wikipedia to shame," Yifan wrote on Zhihu, a Chinese site similar to Quora, where he shared his discovery last month and caused a stir. The scale of the scam came to light after a group of volunteer editors and other Wikipedians, such as Yip, combed through her past contributions to nearly 300 articles.
"As a punishment, Zhemao and her affiliated accounts were suspended permanently," adds VICE World News. "Most of her articles were deleted based on community consensus. Some Wikipedians even wrote to experts, seeking help to separate the wheat from the chaff." A spokesperson of the Wikimedia Foundation told VICE World News in an email that volunteers are still "continuing to review additional articles that may have been affected."

The report goes on to say that Zhemao speaks neither English nor Russian and is a housewife with only a high school degree. She came clean in an apology letter issued on her Wikipedia account last month. "The hoax started with an innocuous intention," reports VICE. "Unable to comprehend scholarly articles in their original language, she pieced sentences together with a translation tool and filled in the blanks with her own imagination. [...] Before long, they had accumulated into tens of thousands of characters, which she was reluctant to delete."

"The alternative accounts were imaginary friends she 'cosplayed' as she was bored and alone, given her husband was away most of the time and she didn't have any friends. She also apologized to actual experts on Russia, whom she had attempted to cozy up to and later impersonated."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

A Bored Chinese Housewife Spent Years Falsifying Russian History On Wikipedia

Comments Filter:
  • by quonset ( 4839537 ) on Wednesday July 13, 2022 @07:11PM (#62700882)

    All she did was have alternative facts.

  • ...is the fact that there are hundreds of Zhemao on all wikis. This is what happens when you let any asshole edit your pages without providing a shred of actual evidence for anything they write. Never, ever rely on a Wikipedia for anything. Always go to primary sources.

    • by youngone ( 975102 ) on Wednesday July 13, 2022 @07:30PM (#62700918)

      ...there are hundreds of Zhemao on all wikis.

      [Citation required]

    • by KalvinB ( 205500 ) on Wednesday July 13, 2022 @10:27PM (#62701248) Homepage

      not the ending point for basic research. It's a great place to get some important keywords and a summary of what you're looking into.

      Names, places, dates, etc. can be researched further.

      It also often links to other more prominent sources for you.

      Anyone who tells you not to use Wikipedia has no idea how the internet works.

      • Anyone who tells you not to use Wikipedia has no idea how the internet works.

        Good thing I didn't say that then. What I did say was...

        Never, ever rely on a Wikipedia for anything. Always go to primary sources.

      • by cstacy ( 534252 )

        not the ending point for basic research. It's a great place to get some important keywords and a summary of what you're looking into.

        Names, places, dates, etc. can be researched further.

        It also often links to other more prominent sources for you.

        Anyone who tells you not to use Wikipedia has no idea how the internet works.

        Anyone who tells you that most people use Wikipedia by following citations to original material, doesn't know how the world (let alone the Internet) works.

        Wikipedia is used and relied upon as an authoritative primary source in itself, by the public, by all the news organizations of record, the government, and even researchers.

        Practically nobody looks at the original sources cited by Wikipedia. Because people who would do that already know what the article says (or should say) because they already read the o

      • What if wikipedia completely censors certain material, along with the links to primary sources?

        Wikipedia editors are often biased, and will completely censor information that does not support their chosen narrative.

        Also, few people check the primary sources.

      • Wikipedia is the starting point, not the ending point for basic research. [...] Anyone who tells you not to use Wikipedia has no idea how the internet works.

        most people use wikipedia as the ending point.

        you can either change how people research topics, or tell them not to use wikipedia.
        one is easier than the other.

    • by The Evil Atheist ( 2484676 ) on Thursday July 14, 2022 @02:32AM (#62701562)
      You know "they" let any asshole write books too, right?
      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        Some publishers do at least have a reputation for vetting what they print though. On Wikipedia the moment you click save whatever you wrote is live, and someone may or may not be along to check it later at some point.

        • by The Evil Atheist ( 2484676 ) on Thursday July 14, 2022 @09:05AM (#62702178)
          But just like Wikipedia, the average person doesn't know which publishers aren't trustworthy.

          Why else would The Secret be such a best seller? Why would holocaust denialism still get published?

          When has any book been traced to the level of edit history, traceable by name and IP address? Wikipedia is amazing for being able to let that happen. No traditional publisher can boast the same, and they'll have financial incentive to not cooperate. Hell, even the papers published by the predatory journal cartel is harder to trace than this.
    • by znrt ( 2424692 ) on Thursday July 14, 2022 @05:12AM (#62701716)

      actually, wikipedia's policy states that everything in it has to be referenced, and that this reference has to be public and available on the net.

      so if you read an article without references, or trace the references and find out they are inexistent or dubious then no, don't rely on it. ideally you would also flag it for revision.

      otherwise wikipedia is the best thing that has happened to human knowledge since gutenberg.

      • References do not need to be publicly available on internet, they need to be reliable and published. A textbook is a perfectly fine source. If you need to pay a fee and get your hand on a physical copy to check the source, that's on you.
  • Sounds like (Score:5, Insightful)

    by beepsky ( 6008348 ) on Wednesday July 13, 2022 @07:21PM (#62700896)
    Sounds like she should be writing novels, not wikipedia
    • Re:Sounds like (Score:4, Insightful)

      by cusco ( 717999 ) <brian@bixby.gmail@com> on Thursday July 14, 2022 @12:30AM (#62701422)

      Publishers are missing out by not offering her a contract.

      • Publishers offer contracts to established writers with a track record, not to random unknowns.

        And many publishers have an office junior put all unsolicited manuscripts directly into the shredder - it reduces their legal fees for fighting allegations of plagiarism.

        A publisher might take a chance on her, because of this publicity. But very likely it'd be on a "30,000 words delivered, before you get a penny" basis. The big problem for publishers with new authors is that very many of them miss deadlines - whi

    • by Wolfrider ( 856 )

      --All she needs is a co-author and she could be cranking out alternate-history novels like the "1632 Ring of Fire" series

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

      --She could make some bank and maybe divorce her absent husband

  • by Hadlock ( 143607 ) on Wednesday July 13, 2022 @07:23PM (#62700904) Homepage Journal

    I did this on wikipedia back in about 2006, was linked/crosslinked to about six other articles at the time. The article was called "American Monarchist Party" and was removed, but then un-deleted in about 2009 by someone who thought it was legit, before finally being deleted forever. It was briefly on deletionpedia, but I can no longer find the link. Mildly concerned that my deleted article was deleted by deletionpedia, but I guess that's about par for the course. The article was a five or six paragraph page about the fictional history, meeting places and current activities of said party, who wanted to elect a hereditary monarch who was unswayed by short term political cycle. Crosslinking your bogus article with a bunch of legitimate articles makes it a lot harder to unwind, as the article notes.

    • Oh actually I was able to find some version of it. Looks like it was on Wikipedia for 1227 days: http://deletionpedia.dbatley.c... [dbatley.com]

    • I did this on wikipedia back in about 2006, was linked/crosslinked to about six other articles at the time.

      Which proves exactly what right now? That only proves that it was easier to edit Wikipedia back then. A lot has changed, for good or for worse.

      So here's my own anecdotal "evidence", I remember editing the Wikipedia article on The Matrix some time before the sequels came out because the article claimed that the movie's graphic effects people invented "bullet time". Well, they're likely right about inventing the term, but not the concept or the principles behind it, which was already a well known effect in sc

  • by Bruce66423 ( 1678196 ) on Wednesday July 13, 2022 @07:37PM (#62700932)

    All she wrote is true... ;) as Robert Heinlein's 'Number of the Beast' argues.

    • Ugh... my first Heinlein novel. Was in a random bookstore many years ago. Me: "Hey, I've heard of Heinlein! Let's check that out." WTF... Could never bring myself to pick up another of his books.

      • Your loss.

        • Not really. Heinlein is way overrated and had a weird obsession with sex and slide rules.

          • Rules for sliding in an out ? Never heard of them. Could you elaborate ?

          • by nagora ( 177841 )

            Not really. Heinlein is way overrated and had a weird obsession with sex and slide rules.

            Heinlein is a complicated and very deep writer. His favourite tactic is to write something that makes you think that's what he personally believes and then subtly undermine it.

            However, he was obsessed with sex. Which is fine by me.

            • by dunkelfalke ( 91624 ) on Thursday July 14, 2022 @04:58AM (#62701712)

              Back in the day, many decades ago, I have read a shitload of SF (I still do, but I've become much more selective with age) and I never found anything specifically deep or complicated about Heinlein's books and consider them badly aged pulp science fiction, not that different from E. E. Smith or Edmond Hamilton. Never had the urge to re-read that stuff, not one of their novels made me skip the night's sleep like, for example "the mote in the god's eye" did. Many stories of Harry Harrison or Stanislaw Lem, on the other hand, haven't aged any better but they are deep enough to still be interesting after a dozen of re-reads. So yep, in my opinion, Heinlein is way overrated.

          • And it must be an universal truth, because you said it. /joke
            I don't think he's the best SF writer out there, and he's not even in my top 20 SF writers, still I believe his books should be consumed. Furthermore, I couldn't care less what kind of human being the writer is, whether he has weaknesses or weird fetishes or whatever his flaws might be. I am reading the book(s), decide whether and how much I like them, and remember the author name to look for more books written by said writer.
            Evaluate the book, no

      • Stick just to those and you'll begin to be impressed. Hint: you don't get retro-Hugos - i.e. awards for material that predates the Hugos - unless it is pretty universally admired.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

  • the fact that the network of stories remained undiscovered for so long might even be a selling point. I myself would be interested what she has all imagined.
  • Firstly, while what this woman did was wrong, it's rather admirable in its own way. I hope she finds a creative outlet.

    Anyways, when you consider that something like half of scientific papers can't be reproduced and that there are endless crappy citations going in loops it's hard not to be discouraged. Recommendation on flossing had to be withdrawn [apnews.com] when it turned out there was no evidence to support it. I read a reddit thread where someone tried to find the original source for something very basic ab
  • by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve ( 949321 ) on Wednesday July 13, 2022 @07:44PM (#62700950)
    Thanks for the CCP, Chinese history is so full of bs that I'm truly shocked that a Chinese researcher would care at all about falsified Russian history and do anything about it. China has all these Korean War "heroes" who did things that nobody can verify actually happened, but they are accepted as complete truth by a significant number of Chinese people. They built a museum to this guy Qiu Shaoyun who may actually have been heroic (the official story is he burned to death rather than give away his position) but as with all communist propaganda, they turn it all into exaggerated lies and bs. My understanding is that they have tons of writings he supposedly produced that seem quite out of character for a guy who was essentially not educated past maybe the equivalent of Middle School.
    • by suss ( 158993 )

      The truth would most likely cause a revolution, so it must be suppressed. Mao was a flawless leader, right?

      • Do you know many people on the Chinese mainland? Do you regularly talk to them. I personally don't discuss this with party members but have regularly discussed it with average Chinese citizens.

        They seem to accept that Mao was both a genius and a monster. In fact their grounded sense of this historical feels far greater than any sense I have as an American for historical American figures. They realize he did terrible things that hurt lots of people but because his vision was to modernize China which has been

        • by Evtim ( 1022085 )

          Well, that worldview assumes that executing the largest genocide the world has ever known was the one and only way to "modernize China". I am calling massive BS on that...

          The Chinese people take the easy choice - rationalize the horror. Same as the Russians with Stalin. Stalin decimated the officer corp before the war, decimated the peasantry and when that resulted in low crops he did the huger genocide in Ukraine. And then he singed a pact with Germany to divide the world between them! On top of that he d

          • I once heard an American say that Christopher Columbus discovered America and that was all I needed to know about what passes for history in America.

            By the way, talking about blunders and genocide. How about the country that celebrates a dude who thought he arrived on the other side of the world and to sell his point, started calling them Indians when any sense of education would of revealed the absolute truth they are nothing a like. Then to further this conquest was part of plans to completely decimate th

            • Except, I know Chinese people IN MALAYSIA who actively deny that the Tiananmen even took place. IT's all made up. fanciful. The homelands can do no wrong. I guess if you're OK with saying both "Others don't admit to their sins, which are horrible" and "Massive sins must be done by us in order to create something I like", then more power to you. Except that's kinda Hitlerian if you really think about it.
            • by cusco ( 717999 )

              There were two estimates for the circumference of the Earth at the time, Columbus believed that Ptolemy's smaller estimate was correct. He had a map of unknown origin (possibly Chinese) which showed islands at a reachable distance, at some point a cartographer had put labels corresponding to the various archipelagos of southeast Asia. He sailed the correct distance, found islands at the right place, with people that looked like what expected Indonesians and Filipinos to look like, found cinnamon (although

              • Also, while Colombus had a good estimate of how far he sailed, he would have no good estimate of how far Marco Polo et. al. had traveled the other way to China.

          • The modernization of China could only happen after Mao's death. It was Deng Xiaoping that is the real hero of China.

            However, I think it is Mao's photo that is proudly displayed in the forbidden city. Because while he might have been a disaster for China, he was a blessing for the Communist party.

            This is a rare case where we can see the alternative history, if the Nationalists had won, because they moved to Taiwan. They were initially very nasty but Taiwan is today a much happier place than China.

        • Certainly that reality is more complex and nuanced than "everyone in china is brainwashed and ignorant about their own history". With such a massive population, like any other country, there are all sorts of people, some fanatical about their government, some ambivalent, some realist, some critical, etc.

          There is some truth to more people being ignorant about Mao due to the extensive propaganda that exists. But that doesn't mean everyone is ignorant about it.

          I have to say though that Mao's contribution was m

    • by _merlin ( 160982 )

      Chinese Wikipedia is blocked in China (unless you use some kind of VPN), although you can access various other language versions of Wikipedia, including English, without issues.

      Either:

      • She's a housewife bored enough to use a VPN to troll Wikipedia.
      • She's from the Republic of China (Taiwan), Hong Kong SAR, or some other special administrative region of the PRC where the Great Firewall doesn't apply.
      • She's ethnically Chinese but lives outside China.

      Anyway, manufacturing heroes isn't unique to China. For exampl

      • Chinese Wikipedia is blocked in China (unless you use some kind of VPN), although you can access various other language versions of Wikipedia, including English, without issues

        Maybe you should have Checked Wikipedia... [wikipedia.org]

        As of April 2019, all versions of Wikipedia are blocked in Mainland China under the Great Firewall.

    • Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)

      by mmdurrant ( 638055 )
      It's amazing to me to see people cite "communist propaganda" as though every school child hasn't heard a bullshit mythos about a cherry tree.
    • I've enjoyed a sci-fi series called The Lost Fleet, about a space warship commander who suffered a surprise enemy attack, got out in a damaged escape pod, and was woken after a century of cryo sleep when he was found after earlier being presumed lost in the battle.

      But his government had subsequently turned him into a near mythological hero to help boost morale at home and in the fleet, and now everyone turned to this "hero" returned from the past to help save the day in that same war that had lasted for a c

    • You do realize a sizeable chunk of the American population thinks slavery was not the major cause of the Civil War, right? Despite numerous documentation from the slavers that say they really were fighting for slavery.

      Then you have other revisionists who claim slavery wasn't a bad thing, to slavery was okay because the Africans also did it.

      And of course, Japanese textbooks barely address the role of Japanese aggression in WWII. Just like the Russians are doing now with Ukraine, they deny any atrocitie
    • There are different versions of wiki for different languages, not for different countries, plenty of Chinese speakers outside mainland China.
    • Reading the news text, I knew someone would be sure to jump out and write something to make general statements about China and the people there. Here we are.
      • To be fair, his general statements are about CCP. While you might interpret that he's generalizing Chinese people, I could interpret his statements as saying that a significant number of people living in such a government would believe those lies. I would also agree with that. Just look at the current state of the US.
  • The major reason why none of us contribute to Wikipedia in the first place.
    Grumpy old white men who think they own Wikipedia and will drive you into giving up with an everlasting discussion.
    Or they are simply hired by PR firms to keep the dirty laundry from the wikipedia pages, reverting every change on the page.

    • I made some small additions and little fixes over the years. It is satisfying to help build this tome of knowledge. I get a lot out it. It is a pity that there are bad actors, but in general the quality of what I look up is very high.
      • Yeah, you'll get the occasional "big fish small pond" asshole power-tripper, like someone who throws their authority around in some pissant Homeowners Associate. And yes, occasionally, there are hoaxes put out there that stick for a time. [wikipedia.org] But in general, I've found it to be an incredibly valuable resource. It's great for finding relatively obscure information, or even technical programming issues (how do I implement A* algorithm, or what is a fast and high quality RNG).

        It works because there are plenty o

  • One particularly helpful use of AI would be to have it validate edits on Wikipedia by analyzing the text from the citations.

    It's hard to unwind bullshit... unless you're a machine.

  • "Then it got worse."

    Chinese history is slightly more interesting. There's pretty writing, kung fu, and hot chicks involved between the disembowelment orgies.
    • by cusco ( 717999 )

      Ah, you don't know anything about Russian history, then. Life was so bad under the czars that Stalin was still preferable for the commoners. The same with China, Cuba and Vietnam, there are reasons why the communist revolutions were never overthrown in those countries, it's because life there before them was so miserable for the majority that almost no one wanted to go back to it.

      • I know enough to know how little value there is in knowing more. China, Cuba, and Vietnam are more interesting in every way.
        • by cusco ( 717999 )

          Well, then you miss the reasons for most of the history of Europe. The Huns, Mongols and Vikings invaded from there, it was the principle route for most of the trade in furs and slaves from Europe (the two largest exports for most of a thousand years) to the civilized world, many of the routes of the Silk Road passed through there, major crops were domesticated there and exported westward, horses and sheep originated in Central Asia, even the Greek civilization got most of their grain from Crimea and south

          • It's a lot of "sound and fury, signifying nothing." The events coming out of there only took on meaning when they intersected with places where the past isn't a monotonous ooze of human decay, hate, and meaningless horror going as far back as the written record.

            As history, it's devoid of profitable context or credible narrative progress.
            • by cusco ( 717999 )

              Certainly, where Russia interacted with China, Persia, Mesopotamia, or Constantinople there was more historical import.

              a monotonous ooze of human decay, hate, and meaningless horror going as far back as the written record.

              I take it you're referring to Western Europe after the fall of Rome? When the Forbidden City was inaugurated ambassadors came from as far away as Zimbabwe, but Europe was such a primitive backwater that it didn't even hear about the event for most of two decades.

              • Certainly, where Russia interacted with China, Persia, Mesopotamia, or Constantinople there was more historical import.

                Indeed, but it doesn't work both ways, does it? China, Persia, and Mesopotamia have interesting internal relics, stories, thoughts, and spiritual viewpoints even without the added spice of Compare & Contrast moments in history. There was a "there" there, in and of itself.

                I take it you're referring to Western Europe after the fall of Rome? When the Forbidden City was inaugurated ambassadors came from as far away as Zimbabwe, but Europe was such a primitive backwater that it didn't even hear about the event for most of two decades.

                The thing about the Dark Ages is that there was a reason for them, and book-ended by much more constructive eras that defined them in the first place. There's no Russian Dark Age (that anyone else would care about) because such a t

                • by cusco ( 717999 )

                  I pity people who deliberately choose to stay ignorant, there's so much to learn in the world and you miss the fun parts on purpose.

                  • There's ignorance, and then there's making an informed decision that a subject is unrewarding. Accusing the latter of being the former is the former.
  • That's frankly cool as shit. She has some serious talent, they need to get her some schooling she could be contributing a lot to society with that kind of brain.
  • That's nothing! Before Wikipedia existed, people made up historical stories about an ordinary guy called Jesus, passing them off as factual.

  • And she would have gotten away with it if not for those pesky kids and their dog Lika.

  • This is exactly how you undermine WP, and always has been. It's a variation in gaming PageRank by building pages that refer to each other.

    The idea that WP is reliable on any topic is just non-sense.

  • I thought this was how Wikipedia is supposed to work.
  • sorry, but Russia does not need any help falsifying their history.

  • by thvv ( 92519 )

    J L Borges wrote the story "Tlön, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius" describing just such a creation of alternate history, and its effect on the world.
    https://sites.evergreen.edu/politicalshakespeares/wp-content/uploads/sites/226/2015/12/Borges-Tl%C3%B6n-Uqbar-Orbius-Tertius.pdf

  • This phrase caught my eye: "which could not be found in Russian historical records" Didn't post-revolutionary Russian government put a great deal of effort into "revising" their own history so as to make communism sound like a good idea? Coverups and deletion of actual Russian history by Soviet agencies are legion and legendary.

  • Actually, wikipedia is useful if you want to find out what happened on a particular episode of "Happy Days."
    But when it comes to history and/or politics, and the like, especially anything controversial, wikipedia is entirely useless.

  • Wikipedia constantly undermines itself without any external help.

  • Too bad she doesn't speak Russian. Trump could use someone with this skill for writing fiction.

"Imitation is the sincerest form of television." -- The New Mighty Mouse

Working...