Wiki-History of Crimea: Ukrainian and Russian Versions
-
Maxim Potapenko
Abstract
Wikipedia is a popular source of information. In Ukraine, it ranks as number four in the website popularity ranking, while it takes sixth place in Russia. Wikipedia is usually treated as an accessible and reliable source of information. As of 2013, over 70 per cent of Ukraine web users read the Russian-language sector of Wikipedia; however, this was not reflected in Russia where the Ukrainian- language part of Wikipedia enjoyed less than one per cent of popularity. The numbers are still standing and, therefore, the Russian-language Wikipedia continues to gravely impact Ukraine’s information environment. Wikipedia authors are reacting to Russia’s hybrid war against Ukraine, having a significant effect on creating a profound gap in the semantics of their publications. This study aims to investigate the nature of the given situation. The range of articles on the history of Crimea, a region that plays a vital role in the Russian-Ukrainian confrontation, will serve as an example. Both sides of the conflict see the past as the primary source of legitimising their rights to Crimea. The earliest articles on the history of Crimea were submitted to the Ukrainian and Russian sections of Wikipedia in 2006. Initially, the Ukrainian section articles of Wikipedia were treated as a second variant. Many of them contained translated Russian texts and borrowings from the Russianlanguage Wikipedia. After 2014, articles on the history of Crimea presented in the Ukrainian section became more independent and original in terms of sources, structure and content. Articles contributed in Russian have a richer editing history and more views. As a result, they have a more significant impact on the information space. From 2006 to the present, the generalising article “History of Crimea” has had 692 edits made by 207 authors. It has been viewed more than 1.3 million times since 2015. The statistics for the Ukrainian version of the article look much bleaker in comparison: 134 edits, 64 authors, more than 0.15 million views. Despite the rule of neutrality of the articles, Wikipedia’s Ukrainian and Russian-language versions contain many opposing statements. These contradictory reviews are especially noticeable in the coverage of recent history: the transfer of Crimea to the USSR in 1954 (Ukr. - saving the Crimean economy, Rus. - increasing the share of Russians in the USSR), the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation in 2014 (Ukr. - occupation, Rus. - accession). Certainly, this is not a new phenomenon and is widespread in the mass media appeal as well. According to Wikipedia’s cross-reference system, the Ukrainian section attributes Crimea to an ethnohistorical region of Europe, while the Russian version treats it as almost exclusively a region of Russia. The predominant practice is politicising any writing and editing articles on the history of Crimea in the Ukrainian and Russian- language sections of Wikipedia. As the political contradictions between Ukraine and the Russian Federation become more profound, they lead to the formation of two wiki versions of the history of Crimea. The authors shall also point to selected controversial differences existing in other languages sections.
Abstract
Wikipedia is a popular source of information. In Ukraine, it ranks as number four in the website popularity ranking, while it takes sixth place in Russia. Wikipedia is usually treated as an accessible and reliable source of information. As of 2013, over 70 per cent of Ukraine web users read the Russian-language sector of Wikipedia; however, this was not reflected in Russia where the Ukrainian- language part of Wikipedia enjoyed less than one per cent of popularity. The numbers are still standing and, therefore, the Russian-language Wikipedia continues to gravely impact Ukraine’s information environment. Wikipedia authors are reacting to Russia’s hybrid war against Ukraine, having a significant effect on creating a profound gap in the semantics of their publications. This study aims to investigate the nature of the given situation. The range of articles on the history of Crimea, a region that plays a vital role in the Russian-Ukrainian confrontation, will serve as an example. Both sides of the conflict see the past as the primary source of legitimising their rights to Crimea. The earliest articles on the history of Crimea were submitted to the Ukrainian and Russian sections of Wikipedia in 2006. Initially, the Ukrainian section articles of Wikipedia were treated as a second variant. Many of them contained translated Russian texts and borrowings from the Russianlanguage Wikipedia. After 2014, articles on the history of Crimea presented in the Ukrainian section became more independent and original in terms of sources, structure and content. Articles contributed in Russian have a richer editing history and more views. As a result, they have a more significant impact on the information space. From 2006 to the present, the generalising article “History of Crimea” has had 692 edits made by 207 authors. It has been viewed more than 1.3 million times since 2015. The statistics for the Ukrainian version of the article look much bleaker in comparison: 134 edits, 64 authors, more than 0.15 million views. Despite the rule of neutrality of the articles, Wikipedia’s Ukrainian and Russian-language versions contain many opposing statements. These contradictory reviews are especially noticeable in the coverage of recent history: the transfer of Crimea to the USSR in 1954 (Ukr. - saving the Crimean economy, Rus. - increasing the share of Russians in the USSR), the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation in 2014 (Ukr. - occupation, Rus. - accession). Certainly, this is not a new phenomenon and is widespread in the mass media appeal as well. According to Wikipedia’s cross-reference system, the Ukrainian section attributes Crimea to an ethnohistorical region of Europe, while the Russian version treats it as almost exclusively a region of Russia. The predominant practice is politicising any writing and editing articles on the history of Crimea in the Ukrainian and Russian- language sections of Wikipedia. As the political contradictions between Ukraine and the Russian Federation become more profound, they lead to the formation of two wiki versions of the history of Crimea. The authors shall also point to selected controversial differences existing in other languages sections.
Chapters in this book
- Frontmatter I
- Contents V
- Introduction 1
-
Between Wikipedia and a Museum: Historical Narrative “Tools”
- Memory Politics and the Study of Crises in International Relations: Insights from Ukraine and Lithuania 11
- Local Memory, International Conflicts: Case Study of the Katyn Memorial in Jersey City, USA 41
- Sources of International Conflicts in Contemporary and Historical Context as a Threat to the Global Democratic and Liberal Order: Causes of Occurrence and Ways of Eradication 59
- The Role of Historical Museums in Overcoming the Traumatic Past 77
- Wiki-History of Crimea: Ukrainian and Russian Versions 91
- The Problem of Preserving Monumental Objects of Art during Contemporary International Conflicts (on the Example of the Russian-Ukrainian Conflict) 105
-
From Different Perspectives: History as an Instrument of Politics
- Historically Charged Conflict: Nagorno-Karabakh between War and Diplomatic Failure 119
- History as an Instrument of Continuing Indo-Pakistan Rivalry from 1947 till 2021 139
- National History as Tools of Installing National Borders in Central Asia Countries 157
- Belgium – Its Neighbours and the Process from a Centralised to a Federalist State 165
- History as an Instrument of Contemporary International Conflicts: The Case of the Sudanese States 179
- The Comparison of Russian Propaganda: From the Years 1917–1921 to Nowadays 193
- List of Contributors 209
Chapters in this book
- Frontmatter I
- Contents V
- Introduction 1
-
Between Wikipedia and a Museum: Historical Narrative “Tools”
- Memory Politics and the Study of Crises in International Relations: Insights from Ukraine and Lithuania 11
- Local Memory, International Conflicts: Case Study of the Katyn Memorial in Jersey City, USA 41
- Sources of International Conflicts in Contemporary and Historical Context as a Threat to the Global Democratic and Liberal Order: Causes of Occurrence and Ways of Eradication 59
- The Role of Historical Museums in Overcoming the Traumatic Past 77
- Wiki-History of Crimea: Ukrainian and Russian Versions 91
- The Problem of Preserving Monumental Objects of Art during Contemporary International Conflicts (on the Example of the Russian-Ukrainian Conflict) 105
-
From Different Perspectives: History as an Instrument of Politics
- Historically Charged Conflict: Nagorno-Karabakh between War and Diplomatic Failure 119
- History as an Instrument of Continuing Indo-Pakistan Rivalry from 1947 till 2021 139
- National History as Tools of Installing National Borders in Central Asia Countries 157
- Belgium – Its Neighbours and the Process from a Centralised to a Federalist State 165
- History as an Instrument of Contemporary International Conflicts: The Case of the Sudanese States 179
- The Comparison of Russian Propaganda: From the Years 1917–1921 to Nowadays 193
- List of Contributors 209
