A Wikipedia scam in which small businesses have been charged “protection money” to safeguard pages about their organisations has prompted the online encyclopaedia to block 381 editor accounts.

The Wikipedia Foundation said the accounts were blocked over “black hat” editing – charging money for the creation of promotional articles – amid allegations that hundreds of businesses and minor celebrities have been blackmailed by scammers posing as Wikipedia administrators.



The site’s editing community launched an investigation dubbed Orangemoody, after the name of the first deceptive, or “sock puppet”, account involved.

The investigation into Wikipedia edits from the end of April until the start of August found a “very large group of socks creating promotional articles, inserting promotional and external links and otherwise editing disruptively”.

It found that those operating the accounts were editing for profit by demanding payments from businesses and personalities for their Wikipedia entries and to protect them from online “vandalism”.

Dan Thompson, who runs a holiday let company, was one of those targeted by a scammer claiming to have Wikipedia “privileges”. He told the Independent: “Maybe I was naive but I suspect I am not alone.”

Under the scam, draft entries were initially declined publication because they contained too much promotional content. Those operating the sock puppet account would then make changes to make the article acceptable for publication. Then, posing as genuine editors or Wikipedia administrators, they would charge businesses a fee for the article to be published. Some businesses were also asked to pay a monthly fee to protect the entries from changes or deletion.

Wikipedia’s investigation warned that the scam had exposed a vulnerability in the way the site operates. It said: “The use of declined drafts … to identify and approach potential clients is a new wrinkle in the way paid editing is being conducted. The return to demand further money to “protect the article is also significant”.

More than 200 articles have been deleted as a result of the investigation, but the foundation said more action was likely to be necessary.



It said many identified accounts were edited before the timeframe of the investigation. “The nature and quality of the edits suggests that this paid editing scheme had been in place for some time before it was fortuitously identified,” it said.

The Wikimedia Foundation said it will be reviewing more articles, and urged Wikipedia users to be on the lookout for similar scams. Suspicious entries can be reported to info-orangemoody@wikipedia.org.

Foundation members Ed Erhart and Juliet Barbara wrote in a blogpost: “Neutrality is key to ensuring Wikipedia’s quality. Although it does not happen often, undisclosed paid advocacy editing may represent a serious conflict of interest and could compromise the quality of content on Wikipedia.

“The practice is in conflict with a number of English Wikipedia’s policies, including neutrality and conflict of interest, and is a violation of the Wikimedia Foundation’s terms of use.”

Not all paid editing is a violation of Wikipedia policies, they pointed out. Museum and university employees around the world edit by disclosing their official affiliations, and several prominent public relations firms have signed an agreement to abide by Wikipedia’s paid editing guidelines.



