Should Wikipedia Put Crimea on the Russian Map?

The world’s largest source of human knowledge cedes Crimea to Russia on the map, but the debate is far from over.

National Journal
Brian Resnick
See more stories about...
Brian Resnick
March 19, 2014, 7:25 a.m.

Above, you see two maps of Rus­sia as sup­plied by Wiki­pe­dia.

“It is not in Wiki­pe­dia’s charter to re­cog­nize the ex­ist­ence of na­tions.”

The one on the left was down­loaded Tues­day at 6:31 p.m. EST, nearly 12 hours after Rus­si­an Pres­id­ent Vladi­mir Putin signed an an­nex­a­tion of the Crimean Pen­in­sula. On this map, Crimea is not in Rus­sia. The map on the right was ac­cessed Wed­nes­day morn­ing, around 10. By then, the com­munity of ed­it­ors tend­ing to the world’s largest re­pos­it­ory of hu­man know­ledge re­cog­nized Rus­sia’s claim to the re­gion.

“Light green rep­res­ents a claimed ter­rit­ory, claimed ter­rit­or­ies do not ne­ces­sar­ily have to be ter­rit­or­ies out­side of de facto con­trol, but rather can be ter­rit­or­ies un­der dis­puted leg­al claims,” an ed­it­or ex­plained on a dis­cus­sion board. Oth­ers ar­gued that Crimea should ap­pear striped on the map, to in­dic­ate out­right an­nex­a­tion (as seen on this map of Mo­rocco). That ten­sion re­flects the world’s as it grapples with how to deal with Rus­sia’s land­grab. Is it a dis­puted ter­rit­ory, or thor­oughly Rus­sia’s? 

This map de­cision came after a bit of an edit­ing war Tues­day, when Crimea was ad­ded and then sub­trac­ted from the map four times be­fore the page was locked by an ad­min­is­trat­or.

Such a small de­tail — a shad­ing of green — is a dif­fi­cult choice for the site’s ed­it­ors. (On con­tro­ver­sial top­ics, ed­it­ors are lim­ited to vet­ted Wiki­pe­di­ans.)  As one of the top search res­ults for both “Crimea” and “Rus­sia,” Wiki­pe­dia will provide the basis of pub­lic un­der­stand­ing of the re­gion.

Tra­di­tion­al me­dia have been grap­pling with this ques­tion, too. On Tues­day, Na­tion­al Geo­graph­ic — a magazine so as­so­ci­ated with maps that it pub­lishes them as center­folds — de­cided to add Crimea to Rus­sia, though also in a spe­cial shade to des­ig­nate the dis­pute. “We map de facto, in oth­er words we map the world as it is, not as people would like it to be,” Juan Valdés, the magazine’s top map­maker, told U.S. News & World Re­port

The Crimea ques­tion on Wiki­pe­dia is far from over. The map might show Crimea in light green for now, but on both the “Rus­sia” and “Crimea” art­icle pages on the Eng­lish Wiki­pe­dia site, the pen­in­sula’s status is de­scribed as “dis­puted.”

On the dis­cus­sion boards for these pages (where ed­it­ors de­bate the ed­it­or­i­al strategy of the entries) the Rus­si­an an­nex­a­tion of Crimea has fueled something of a philo­soph­ic­al de­bate of how Wiki­pe­dia should cov­er fast-chan­ging world events.

“The biggest dis­ap­point­ment would be to let this art­icle use for pro­pa­ganda pur­poses of in­volved sides, USA, EU and Rus­sia,” an an­onym­ous ed­it­or wrote on the Crimea-art­icle dis­cus­sion page.

“Such a des­ig­na­tion has not been of­fi­cially re­cog­nized yet by any ma­jor gov­ern­ment or the United Na­tions,” wrote a user called Day­dream­er­302000. “It is not in Wiki­pe­dia’s charter to re­cog­nize the ex­ist­ence of na­tions.”

“As of now it has been re­cog­nized by Rus­sia,” a user called Cheesen­ibbles re­tor­ted.

“IMO this art­icle is/should be about the geo­graph­ic­al area con­sidered the Crimea, not the polit­ic­al lines in the sand (in the same way that the art­icle on Kosovo is sep­ar­ate to the art­icle on the Re­pub­lic of Kosovo). We should however change the map to re­flect that polit­ic­al it’s no longer part of Ukraine and up­date the de­scrip­tion ac­cord­ingly,” an­oth­er user wrote.

Cur­rently (10:20 a.m. Wed­nes­day), the ac­tu­al art­icle text reads, “Due to re­cent polit­ic­al in­stabil­ity in the re­gion and oc­cu­pa­tion by Rus­si­an mil­it­ary forces, na­tion­al sov­er­eignty over the pen­in­sula is cur­rently be­ing dis­puted by Rus­sia and Ukraine.”

But that could very well have changed by now. 

What We're Following See More »
TAKING A LONG VIEW TO SOUTHERN STATES
In Dropout Speech, Santorum Endorses Rubio
1 days ago
THE DETAILS

As expected after earlier reports on Wednesday, Rick Santorum ended his presidential bid. But less expected: he threw his support to Marco Rubio. After noting he spoke with Rubio the day before for an hour, he said, “Someone who has a real understanding of the threat of ISIS, real understanding of the threat of fundamentalist Islam, and has experience, one of the things I wanted was someone who has experience in this area, and that’s why we decided to support Marco Rubio.” It doesn’t figure to help Rubio much in New Hampshire, but the Santorum nod could pay dividends down the road in southern states.

Source:
‘PITTING PEOPLE AGAINST EACH OTHER’
Rubio, Trump Question Obama’s Mosque Visit
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

President Obama’s decision to visit a mosque in Baltimore today was never going to be completely uncontroversial. And Donald Trump and Marco Rubio proved it. “Maybe he feels comfortable there,” Trump told interviewer Greta van Susteren on Fox News. “There are a lot of places he can go, and he chose a mosque.” And in New Hampshire, Rubio said of Obama, “Always pitting people against each other. Always. Look at today – he gave a speech at a mosque. Oh, you know, basically implying that America is discriminating against Muslims.”

Source:
THE TIME IS NOW, TED
Cruz Must Max Out on Evangelical Support through Early March
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

For Ted Cruz, a strong showing in New Hampshire would be nice, but not necessary. That’s because evangelical voters only make up 21% of the Granite State’s population. “But from the February 20 South Carolina primary through March 15, there are nine states (South Carolina, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Kentucky, Mississippi, and North Carolina) with an estimated white-Evangelical percentage of the GOP electorate over 60 percent, and another four (Texas, Kansas, Louisiana, and Missouri) that come in over 50 percent.” But after that, he better be in the catbird’s seat, because only four smaller states remain with evangelical voter majorities.

Source:
CHRISTIE, BUSH TRYING TO TAKE HIM DOWN
Rubio Now Winning the ‘Endorsement Primary’
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Since his strong third-place finish in Iowa, Marco Rubio has won endorsement by two sitting senators and two congressmen, putting him in the lead for the first time of FiveThirtyEight‘s Endorsement Tracker. “Some politicians had put early support behind Jeb Bush — he had led [their] list since August — but since January the only new endorsement he has received was from former presidential candidate Sen. Lindsey Graham.” Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that fueled by resentment, “members of the Bush and Christie campaigns have communicated about their mutual desire to halt … Rubio’s rise in the polls.”

Source:
ARE YOU THE GATEKEEPER?
Sanders: Obama Is a Progressive
20 hours ago
THE LATEST

“Do I think President Obama is a progressive? Yeah, I do,” said Bernie Sanders, in response to a direct question in tonight’s debate. “I think they’ve done a great job.” But Hillary Clinton wasn’t content to sit out the latest chapter in the great debate over the definition of progressivism. “In your definition, with you being the gatekeeper of progressivism, I don’t think anyone else fits that definition,” she told Sanders.

×