The work of Correct the Record was reportedly focused on social media platforms, such as Twitter, Facebook, and Reddit. However, it has been noted that aggressive counter-messaging that has acted to defend former First Lady Clinton from criticism has been experienced on Wikipedia, the crowd-sourced online encyclopedia. Well-sourced facts that have reflected negatively on former First Lady Clinton have been removed from Wikipedia. For example, the fact that the Clinton Foundation accepted a donation from the Government of Qatar, became the subject of controversy on Wikipedia. After it had been noted that the Clinton Foundation had accepted donations from nine nations, including Qatar, without consultation with the U.S. State Department, the fact that the lack of consultation may have violated an ethics agreement former First Lady Clinton signed with the U.S. Department of State was deleted from Wikipedia's entry for the Clinton Foundation-State Department controversy. The Wikipedia editor, who deleted information about the possible ethics violation, noted that removal was made in order to "tone down POV wording," referring to point-of-view, even though the source of the information, a Reuters wire service report, revealed that former First Lady Clinton had signed an ethics agreement and promised to notify the U.S. State Department of material donations to the Clinton Foundation. The Reuters report confirmed that the Clinton Foundation did not always notify the U.S. Department of material donations, as was promised. The donation from the Government of Qatar attracted attention from the press, because, in the past, Qatar has been a supporter of Hamas.*

The entry for the Clinton Foundation-State Department controversy provides an overview about reported conflicts of interest between the Clinton Foundation, including its funding, and the work of former First Lady Clinton when she served as U.S. Secretary of State. In addition to being reportedly purged of unflattering yet well-sourced information about former First Lady Clinton, the entry for the Clinton Foundation-State Department controversy was targeted for deletion. In the Wikipedia entry for the Ready for Hillary Super PAC, information was scrubbed about contributions received by the Super PAC from lobbyists tied to private prison corporations.

When a contributor to Wikipedia complained about systemic bias in the entry for the Clinton Foundation, one of the core Wikipedia editors, who coïncidentally supported the deletion of the entry for the Clinton Foundation-State Department controversy, retorted, "Blah blah blah. This argument is really old. Try discussing the issues and comment on the content, not the editors." It is not known if any of the editors, who were responsible for removing critical information about former First Lady Clinton or who supported deletion of the Clinton Foundation-State Department controversy entry, are connected to Correct the Record. A request for an interview sent to Mr. Brock and to Media Matters of America, a watchdog group founded by Mr. Brock, was not answered.

Similarly, a request for an interview sent to the press office of the Wikimedia Foundation, which operates Wikipedia, was not answered. In the past, government reform activists have expressed criticism about the high level of influence that a small number of core Wikipedia editors have been able to exert over the contributions made by the general public. In 2006, open data advocate Aaron Swartz was seeking to join the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Directors. During Mr. Swartz's campaign, he dispelled the notion that the public could meaningfully contribute to Wikipedia, noting that after "an outsider makes one edit to add a chunk of information, then insiders make several edits tweaking and reformatting it." Of the imbalance of power over final control over the edits made to Wikipedia, Mr. Swartz wrote, "The more frightening problem is that people love to get power and hate to give it up." Because Wikimedia Foundation did not answer the request for an interview, it is not known what measures Wikipedia has taken to guarantee that the insular control by its core editors are not misused by outside groups for political ends.

In a report filed by the journalist Evan Halper for The Los Angeles Times, it was noted that Correct the Record operatives would aim, in part, to "stop the spread of online misinformation and misogyny." However, some of the allegations made online against Correct the Record include the spread of false or misleading information.

Edits to Wikipedia not only appeared to defend Clinton ; edits also appeared to deliberately negatively portray her political rivals

In addition to the removal of unflattering information from Wikipedia, operatives for Correct the Record have been blamed by government reform activists for altering the Wikipedia entries of political rivals of former First Lady Clinton. For example, the general nature of the extreme statements made about Green Party vice presidential candidate Ajamu Baraka on his Wikipedia entry came to the attention of the supporters of Mr. Baraka's presidential running mate, Dr. Stein. On the social media site Reddit, a post asked that individuals with Wikipedia credentials to restore balance to the entry about Mr. Baraka, beseeching, "It's incredibly biased and takes everything he has said completely out of context. We need to get this fixed before the debate." Blame was placed on "CTR," initials that became shorthand for Correct the Record.