A group of editors at Wikipedia, the free user-generated encyclopedia, have voted against classifying NFTs as an art form. and a consensus has been reached to archive the matter until a later date.
At the end of December, a poll and debate began on the platform that revolved around to the most expensive art sales of living artists already whether NFT art sales should be considered “art sales” or “NFT sales”.
“Wikipedia really can’t be in the business of deciding what counts as art or not, so putting NFTs, art or not, on its own list makes things a lot simpler.”wrote editor “jonas”.
Much of the discussion centered on whether an NFT represented the art or if it was simply a token independent of the underlying art.. The editors were divided on the definitions and some felt that reliable information was lacking to reach a conclusion.
In a vote, five publishers opposed including NFTs in art sales and only one supported them.. Consensus was reached on January 12 to remove Pak’s NFT collection, which reached $ 91 million, and Beeple’s NFT, of $ 69 million, from the list of best art sales sales and reopen the debate at a later date.
The decision seems controversial when looking at Beeple’s NFT “Everydays: The First 5000 Days” in particular, which depicts a collage of original artwork by a renowned artist. digital that was sold at the prestigious art auction house Christie’s last March. The New York Times also described Beeple as the “third best-selling living artist” at the time..
According to Wikipedia guidelines, neither a unaminity nor a vote is required to form a consensus. To reach a decision, the consensus must take into account all the legitimate concerns of the participating publishers that fall within the policies of the platform..
What do Wikipedia editors know?
But nevertheless, the consensus position was not welcomed by the only publisher who supports the NFTs, “Pmmccurdy”, who argued:
“How can we have a consensus when, from the beginning, I have advocated the inclusion of NFTs on this list? The overwhelming evidence from secondary sources places the art of NFTs as art and therefore worthy of being included in this list. “
“If we agree that Beeple and Pak are artists, why don’t their sales count on this list? I don’t understand the logic here, “they added.
The editor “SiliconRed” replied that the consensus they were reading was that: “NFTs should be removed from this list for now with the intention of reopening the debate at a later date.. To my understanding, this incorporates all concerns, including yours. “
NFT advocates such as Nifty Gateway co-founder Griffin Cock Foster were irritated by the issue., pointing out on Twitter today that:
“This is quite difficult to see; Wikipedia mods are trying to say that * no * NFT can be art. Something like … if it’s an NFT, it can’t be classified as art. “
Foster’s twin brother, Duncan chimed in, too, labeling it an “Art Emergency” as he called the community to action through a post that was retweeted by Gemini co-founder Tyler Winklevoss..
“Wikipedia builds on the precedents. If NFTs are classified as ‘no art’ on this page, then they will be classified as ‘no art’ on the rest of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is the global source of truth for many around the world. The stakes could not be higher, “he said..
Art Emergency !!
There is a debate happening rn on @Wikipedia that has the potential to * officially categorize NFTs as ‘not art’ on all of Wikipedia. *
Wikipedia is a global source of truth. Having NFTs categorized as ‘not art’ would be a disaster!
:
– Duncan Cock Foster (@DCCockFoster) January 12, 2022
Artistic emergency!
There is an ongoing debate on @Wikipedia that has the potential to * officially categorize NFTs as ‘no art’ throughout Wikipedia. * Wikipedia is a global source of truth. To have NFT categorized as ‘no art’ would be a disaster!
Everipedia, a decentralized equivalent of Wikipedia on the Web3, answered to the platform comparing their approach to NFTs and art:
“Everipedia editors have created more than 100 pages on collections of #NFT while Wikipedia is moving to mark NFTs as “no art” across its platform. It’s time for NFT projects to move to Everipedia $ IQ, a Web 3.0 encyclopedia that supports art and innovation. “
This is not the first time that Wikipedia has had problems with information related to cryptocurrencies. Cointelegraph reported in September 2020 that anti-crypto activist and senior Wikipedia editor David Gerard helped remove an entry related to Australian blockchain software firm Power Ledger.
Gerard stated that the entry was removed for “being a bunch of churnalism releases, and the only genuine press coverage was about how Power Ledger was a scam”, despite the fact that the entry originated from reputable publications such as TechCrunch and The Economic Times.
Keep reading: