Wikipedia has been hit by a blackmail scandal with 'rogue editors' charging small businesses and minor celebrities hundreds of pounds to 'protect' pages from defamatory content, it has emerged.

The scam, which is said to have affected high street businesses from Dorset to Northern Ireland and a former Britain's Got Talent contestant, saw tricksters charge people in exchange for amending and updating their promotional pages.

Wikipedia, the online encyclopaedia which is edited entirely by volunteers and contains nearly five million articles, has now blocked 381 user accounts for 'black hat' editing.

Scroll down for video

The scam, which is said to have affected businesses from Dorset to Northern Ireland and a former Britain's Got Talent star, saw fraudsters charge people in exchange for amending and updating their Wikipedia pages

It said the accounts were suspended after an internal investigation found they were engaged in 'undisclosed paid advocacy', a violation of the website's terms which bans users from accepting payment to promote external interest.

Wikipedia said that as a result of the two-month investigation, dubbed 'Orangemoody', the website had also deleted 210 articles created by the rogue users.

Most of these articles, which were related to businesses, business people, or artists, were generally promotional in nature, and often included biased or skewed information, unattributed material, and potential copyright violations, Wikipedia said.

They had been created or amended by the 'sockpuppet accounts' - a term which refers to multiple accounts used by one person or a group in misleading or deceptive ways - in return for payment from the unknowing victims.

In some instances, the fraudsters' demands for money from companies or private individuals amounted to blackmail, Wikipedia said.

The website branded the scam an 'abuse of trust' and said it believes those responsible were a 'coordinated group'.

A spokesman for Wikimedia – the voluntary body which runs Wikipedia - said: '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.

People who abuse the trust and goodwill of others are committing a terrible act Wikipedia

'We are dismayed to learn about how well-intentioned people have been misled. This runs counter to the values to which we aspire and celebrate.

'The Wikimedia Foundation supports independence, transparency, and integrity, and aspires to advance those values in the world.

'People who abuse the trust and goodwill of others are committing a terrible act. We will continue to work to support our editors and administrators in serving as a vigilant defence against such incidents and in hopes that they can prevent future incidents like this from occurring.'

It said the banned users had received one of the 'highest forms of disciplinary action administered by Wikipedia' but said that while users will no longer be able to edit pages, they could still access the site as the block is based on individual accounts and not IP addresses.

The matter has not yet been reported to police, but Wikipedia said an internal investigation remains ongoing into the 'origin of the malicious accounts'.

Former Britain's Got Talent contestant Paul Manners was among those to be duped in the Wikipedia scandal

A spokesman added: 'This investigation will likely take in the range of days to weeks to conclude. The volunteer investigative team that identified these malicious accounts chose to make their findings public in order to engage additional volunteers in the investigation process.

'The Wikimedia Foundation is working with our community to understand what potential legal response, if any, is appropriate.'

Wikipedia is like a normal encyclopaedia but its pages can be created and edited online by anyone.

A team of volunteer administrators moderate the site and monitor changes made, and any amendments are logged in an audit trail which can be linked back to users.

Since its launch in 2001 by American entrepreneur Jimmy Wales, the website has become the most popular general reference site on the internet and now contains more than 36million entries in 290 languages. Nearly 900 new articles are created every day, and the site boasts more than 30,000 active editors per month.

HOW DOES WIKIPEDIA WORK? Wikipedia is like a normal encyclopaedia but its pages can be created and edited online by anyone. A team of volunteer administrators moderate the site and monitor changes made, and any amendments are logged in an audit trail which can be linked back to users. Since its launch in 2001, the website has become the most popular general reference site on the internet and now contains more than 36million entries in 290 languages. Nearly 900 new articles are created every day, and the site boasts more than 30,000 active editors per month. However, the online encyclopaedia has come under fire for its accuracy in recent years with a previous study by the Public Relations Journal finding that 60 per cent of articles had factual errors. With pages being edited by the public, both human error in factual information can occur, as well as those who want to sabotage entries. Advertisement

However, the online encyclopaedia has come under fire for its accuracy in recent years with a previous study by the Public Relations Journal finding that 60 per cent of articles had factual errors.

With pages being edited by the public, both human error in factual information can occur, as well as those who want to sabotage entries.

Among the victims of the latest scandal is Alicia Peyrano, the founder of the Little Citizens Boutique – an online toy shop in Holywood, Northern Ireland.

She said she was contacted by an individual who claimed to be an established Wikipedia user and they told her they could get a page on her business published.

The 39-year-old told MailOnline: ‘I was conned. It’s a really sophisticated ring that is pretending to be Wikipedia. They definitely pulled the wool over my eyes.

‘They pretended to be an author who is established with Wikipedia and said they could get our entry published. It was published for a day or two and then it was taken down. I didn’t even think twice about it.’

She said the person contacted her after her own attempt at creating a Wikipedia page for her business was rejected ‘on the grounds of being too promotional’.

However, she is now unsure whether this was actually rejected by official Wikipedia representatives, or the scammers who later conned her.

She said: ‘I’m not even sure the rejection could have happened by Wikipedia.

‘There’s was a lot of coordination of thinking and falsifying of accounts by the scammers.

‘They asked for $150 from me but luckily I delayed payment by two days and that’s when I saw the article had been taken down so I refused to pay. I had a lucky escape.'

She added: ‘They went to a lot of trouble to do what they’ve done, it’s a very sophisticated group of people and I love the way Wikipedia has found them out and challenged them. I hope they get to the bottom of who these people are.

'This is the kind of online scam that we’re going to be facing into the future, they are going to get more and more elaborate.'

Since its launch in 2001 by American entrepreneur Jimmy Wales (above), Wikipedia has become the most popular general reference site on the internet and now contains more than 36million entries in 290 languages

Amanda Foster, a stunt double from Chelmsford, Essex, was also charged £29 by a person claiming to work for Wikipedia, after they offered to help her publish a page.

She told The Independent: 'I will now contest these payments as it is clear I have been taken advantage of. I feel like I've been totally robbed. I'm really annoyed by this, I really am.'

Another person targeted by the scammers was Dan Thompson, the general manager of British holiday company Quality Villas, which is based in Berkhamsted, Hertfordshire.

He said he was contacted by someone acting as a representative of Wikipedia after he tried and failed to set up a page for his business earlier this year.

He said that after his entry was declined 'because of lack of notability', he was contacted by an individual who claimed they could 'rewrite the content to make it Wiki acceptable using reliable references available and use my privileges to publish it.'

He told the Independent: 'The latter part, 'my privileges', led me to believe I was dealing with someone at Wikipedia. I was grateful at the time that they would rewrite the text to conform to standards and thanked them for doing it. Shortly afterwards, a modified version was posted online. 'The 'editor' presented me with a charge of $400 [£260] for the work.'

This is the kind of online scam that we’re going to be facing into the future, they are going to get more and more elaborate Victim Alicia Peyrano

Other victims are said to include Tiffany Wright, a journalist for Grazia and Cosmopolitan magazines, and former Britain's Got Talent contestant Paul Manners who said 'it's quite sad that there are a lot of nasty people in the world'.

Wikipedia has now called on its users to 'be kind to the article subjects', describing them as the 'victims in this situation'.

While the website has banned the 381 accounts for accepting payment in return for editing articles, not all paid editing is a violation of Wikipedia policies.

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.

Editing Wikipedia is free and only requires compliance with the project's editorial guidelines.

It is not the first time Wikipedia has been forced to ban users who violated its terms and conditions by accepting payments without revealing their affiliations.

In October 2013, the site blocked hundreds of accounts relating to the consulting firm Wiki-PR.