I've long preferred "clique" over "cabal" as the word to describe what was present on Wikipedia when a predictable group of "the usual suspects" gangs up to force their view on various matters to be treated as "consensus" and "common sense" even if it's actually nonsense that's held by a minority. The group that does this isn't all-powerful and well-organized to the extent that it deserves to be called a "cabal", but it's a fairly tight-knit group of friends that's certainly a "clique". (Although, Wiktionary gives "cabal" as one of its synonyms.) It's also assisted by a decent-size army of sycophants that play yes-man to them, for which "claque" is possibly the applicable word.

However, there's also another phenomenon going on, for which I don't know of a good English word. It's that there's a decent-size cluster of people, spread throughout Wikipedia-related circles, including people both within the controlling clique of Wikipedia, and among the ranks of anti-Wikipedia critics such as right here in this site, who are tightly interrelated in a complex network of connections, friendships, enimities, rivalries, feuds, grudges, favors, mutual backscratching, vindictive retribution, and other things, extending in some cases way back in time, and across many different sites, forums, subjects, and places both on and offline. There's a backstory there that puts the convoluted continuity of the DC and Marvel comic book universes to shame, and I only know tiny bits and pieces of it myself, but an awful lot of what goes on both on Wikipedia and on Wikipedia Review owes its existence to this tangled mess. The policy against linking to so-called "attack sites", which (according to somebody posting here recently) had its genesis in the sour grapes of a Wikipedia admin for getting banned briefly from an early version of this site, is one obvious example.

I propose calling this cluster of interrelated individuals a "cluque", to keep it similar to "clique" and "claque".

Any "newbie" stumbling onto a project or community that's under the control of people involved in a cluque is bound to be completely mystified by the illogic of various policy decisions that keep being made, and frustrated at their complete inability to achieve any change in them through naively following the rules and principles of the community as officially written. Only knowledge of more details of the backstory can possibly make sense out of them, and usually one of the aims pursued by various cluque members will be to obscure, cover up, and suppress inquiry into this story.

Still a clique old chap, just a slightly different form of one.

Having a social anthropologist in the family who studies cults and charismatic groups and such, we have often discussed this particular aspect of Wikiphenomenology. "Clique" is nowhere near strong enough to suggest the complexity and the scale of what's involved. Really "cabal" and "cult" are close enough but more officious terms of art are "caliphate", "shogunate", and "sultanate", if you like those better. When a bundle of capital or cash is on the barrelhead, or more likely under the table, then it's called a "cartel". In political terms, Wikipedia is an old-fangled "machine" that involves cores within cores of ever more protected and powerful elites, surrounded by shell upon shell of duped and exploited shills, who are such dopes as to buy the phantasy that they are a part of some populist revolt.

Then of course there's Vonnegut's "granfalloon", but that would only serve to trivialize the seriousness of life-&-death issues with a more comic than tragic humour.

Jonny

In response to the immense popularity of Wikipedia, Jimbo Wales has announced today an expansion pack to the popular encyclopedia anyone can edit titled, Wikipedia: Clique Master. Now you too can create and expand your very own group, organization, governing body, association, establishment, administration, union, clique, cult, cabal, cartel, caliphate, shogunate, federation or city-state and massacre your enemies and in the process revise history to be in line with your own vision. So, what are you waiting for? The fate of the world rests in your hands!

Suggested retail: $49.99

Order now from the Wikipedia store and we'll throw in a free tote-bag!

Or totem poll if you prefer …

Jonny

Note that, in Isaac Asimov's Foundation Series (once a trilogy, but expanded beyond that), the clique that Hari Seldon sets up for the purpose of ultimately conquering the galaxy in 1000 years was established with the ostensible purpose of creating an encyclopedia. And it's called the "Foundation". Is that what the Wikimedia Foundation is there for?



It does have the unusual feature that not everybody in it is on the same side; some are bitterly fighting against one another, and the fallout from these battles affects many people. Doesn't "clique" imply that they're all together? The group I'm alluding to includes some gangs of "banned trolls" alongside the WikiCabal that banned them; they're all acting out of motives based more on the backstory of personality conflicts than anything related to the ostensible purpose or philosophy of Wikipedia.

*yanks collar uncomfortably*

Dear God...

That is brilliant. Which of the Foundation novels deals with the Encyclopedists? If you don't mind a book report how did the encyclopedic project turn into cosmic imperialism. Oh never mind, I'll read I myself.

No, you are still buying the phantasy that it's some kind of e-mergent spontaneous generation thing. And the word "clique" keeps you trapped in the notion that it's a junior high school personality-popularity thing that arises artlessly enough among the innocents. It's just not like that. The wikipower mongers at the top of the wikipile know exactly what they're doing — they are not 12 years old, and they have spent a lifetime acquiring and honing their con-art skills. We are dealing with Rove-ing experts in the manipulation of the clueless masses.

I recognize how hard yer working at it, but please — try to cache up …

Jonny

I think this is a very good description of what I also see, as somewhat of an outsider in both places. I don't think that this phenomenon is exclusive to internet communities...there is probably a sociological term for this thing you call a 'cluque'.


I agree here too, with the caveat that these individuals do not knowingly form and do this; indeed they may be too close to the situation to realize these actions.

dtobias, is there a proposal to limit this, outside of the destruction of the ego, or is this just an observation on your part? In any case, I think it is a good observation.