Changes

In all, the ''median'' duration of a damaged edit was 6 minutes, but the ''mean'' duration was 1,440 minutes (exactly 24 hours). These 100 articles were viewed approximately 12.8 million times in the fourth quarter of 2007. Over 378,000 of those views could be considered “damaged”, yielding a 2.96% rate of damaged views. There were about 13.2 million article-minutes during the quarter, and over 901,000 of those article-minutes were in a damaged state — 6.80%.

In all, the ''median'' duration of a damaged edit was 6 minutes, but the ''mean'' duration was 1,440 minutes (exactly 24 hours). These 100 articles were viewed approximately 12.8 million times in the fourth quarter of 2007. Over 378,000 of those views could be considered “damaged”, yielding a 2.96% rate of damaged views. There were about 13.2 million article-minutes during the quarter, and over 901,000 of those article-minutes were in a damaged state — 6.80%.

This is not an issue of “damaged” versus “acceptable” rates. Rather, it is an issue that the [[Directory:Wikimedia Foundation|Wikimedia Foundation]] allows anonymous editors to append the article about [[Directory:Hillary Clinton|Hillary Clinton]] with “'''hillary needs to die and chop of her penis'''”; or to modify the article about Bob Menendez to say “'''Menendez and Jacobsen have since divorced because he was cheating on her'''”; all without any meaningful effort to change the parameters of editing to disallow this kind of drive-by hatred and libel.

This is not an issue of “damaged” versus “acceptable” rates. Rather, it is an issue that the [[Directory:Wikimedia Foundation|Wikimedia Foundation]] allows anonymous editors to append the article about [[Directory:Hillary Clinton|Hillary Clinton]] with “'''hillary needs to die and chop of her penis'''”; or to modify the article about Bob Menendez to say “'''Menendez and Jacobsen have since divorced because he was cheating on her'''”; all without any meaningful effort to change the parameters of editing to disallow this kind of drive-by hatred and libel. We note that the Wikipedia article about its co-founder, [[Directory:Jimmy Wales|Jimmy Wales]] is kept in a state of "semi-protection", which wards off easily 95% of this sort of vandalism.  Why is this level of protection not extended to all biographies of living persons on Wikipedia?

== Notorious examples ==

== Notorious examples ==