Wikipedia’s lack of coverage is a more serious concern in an era when more and more users get their information from artificial intelligence tools like ChatGPT. The report cites data from AI tracking site Profound, showing that 7.8% of source links on ChatGPT go to Wikipedia, compared to 1.8% and 1.1% to Reddit and Forbes, respectively, in second and third place.
The report also cites data from Trakkr, showing that Wikipedia accounted for 36% of the top 10 citation links on ChatGPT and 25% of the top 100.
Contrary to popular belief, not everyone can create a Wikipedia page. The mastery of doing so involves going through levels of protection and moderation views, according to the Chainstory report. Volunteer reviewers must compare potential new articles on a number of factors, such as notoriety, verifiability, and reliable sources.
Even when an item makes it through the process, it can still be removed by admins or through a 7-day community vote, which cannot be appealed.
What doesn’t help crypto projects is Wikipedia’s guidelines for crypto-centric news organizations (including CoinDesk), which describe them as “overwhelmingly enthusiastic about cryptocurrencies” and “generally unreliable.”
Major media outlets that cover cryptocurrencies, such as Reuters and Bloomberg, are considered reliable, according to the report. but they are less likely to explore specific areas of the industry, such as liquid betting and perpetual swaps.
