WikiTrust
MediaWiki extension that color-codes the text of Wikipedia articles according to its calculated trust
WikiTrust was a software product, available as a Firefox Plugin, which aimed to assist editors in detecting vandalism and dubious edits by highlighting the "untrustworthy" text with a yellow or orange background. As of September 2017, the server is offline, but the code is still available for download.
When the UCSC server was active, WikiTrust assessed the credibility of content and author reputation of wiki articles using an automated algorithm. WikiTrust provides a plug-in for servers using the MediaWiki platform, such as Wikipedia. When installed, it was designed to enable users of that website to obtain information about the author, origin, and reliability of that website's wiki text. Content that is stable, based on an analysis of article history, should be displayed in normal black-on-white type, and content that is not stable is highlighted in varying shades of yellow or orange. It was formerly available for several language versions of Wikipedia.
WikiTrust on Wikipedia was undertaken by the Online Collaboration Lab at the University of California, Santa Cruz, in response to a Meta-wiki quality initiative sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation. The project, discussed at Wikimania 2009, was one of a number of quality/rating tools for Wikipedia content that the Wikimedia Foundation was considering. Communications of the ACM (August 2011) had an article on it.
“WikiTrust” enters the record as mediaWiki extension that color-codes the text of Wikipedia articles according to its calculated trust. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what WikiTrust, MediaWiki and extension can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“WikiTrust” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, WikiTrust, MediaWiki and extension provides the most credible route into that argument.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 23, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q1143557. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2017, 2009 and 2011.
Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “WikiTrust”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow WikiTrust primary sources, WikiTrust archive and WikiTrust research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “WikiTrust”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “WikiTrust” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.