Politics & ideology
Democratic Party (United States)
The mix of footnotes changed; no single large rewrite stood out.
Something to inspect — not a judgment of bias or bad faith.
Overview
Use this briefing to choose what to inspect. The tabs contain the underlying comparisons.
Open the live English Wikipedia article ↗No current rewrite result is available for this article. This is missing coverage, not a finding that no rewrite occurred.
Different websites cited: 155 → 131. We do not rate those sites. See Citations.
Who wrote today’s text?
Half of the wording still on the page is about 2.7 years old or newer. 53.7% was written in the last 3 years. The ten most active accounts wrote 52.7% of what is there now (authorship is more spread out; 750 different accounts overall). Snapshot data on this page runs through 2026-01-01.This is background only — a small group of writers is common on specialist pages.
Available evidence: Citations, Versions.
Not available in this export: Rewrite, Vocabulary, Framing, Facts. Missing coverage is not a negative finding.
Rewrite analysis is not available
No current rewrite result is available for this article. This is missing coverage, not a finding that no rewrite occurred.
Persistence-weighted changeThe share of wording lost, weighted so text that survived more snapshots counts more. by interval
Each row reports established wording lost, standing wording gained, and paired change as a replacement lead. The bar shows loss for continuity with earlier reports. Below-floor anomalies remain descriptive evidence but cannot receive exact confirmation. A coverage gap is shown descriptively but excluded from detector decisions. Candidate-window labels report the exact revision-level decision for the broader window containing that interval.
How the detector reached this state
- 1 · Coarse scanA snapshot comparison that finds candidate windows for closer inspection.Candidate signal foundThe coarse scan found a deletion-heavy window worth exact checking.
- 2 · Interval scoring24 intervals scoredThe bars below show persistence-weighted wording loss for each interval.
- 3 · Exact checkA revision-level test of whether a candidate window's durable spine collapsed.UnavailableNo current revision-level decision can be published.
- 2003-01-01Loss 20.6%42 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2004-01-01Loss 6.7%94 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2005-01-01Loss 16.1%598 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2006-01-01Loss 83.2%9,137 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2007-01-01Loss 59.5%9,673 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2008-01-01Loss 67.5%20,233 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2009-01-01Loss 29.0%8,577 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2010-01-01Loss 10.2%4,411 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2011-01-01Loss 6.0%3,832 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2012-01-01Loss 6.8%5,969 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2013-01-01Loss 2.5%2,698 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2014-01-01Loss 7.3%10,042 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2015-01-01Loss 8.7%13,871 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2016-01-01Loss 10.2%18,856 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2017-01-01Loss 6.2%12,689 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2018-01-01Loss 3.0%7,244 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2019-01-01Loss 3.3%9,644 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2020-01-01Loss 3.8%12,806 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2021-01-01Loss 11.9%45,917 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2022-01-01Loss 7.0%28,770 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2023-01-01Loss 4.7%21,164 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2024-01-01Loss 27.8%142,360 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2025-01-01Loss 15.5%68,936 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2026-01-01Loss 6.9%31,648 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
How the footnotes changed
How the article's own footnotes changed across the rewrite: which websites and books were cited more or less. We only show the mix — we do not rate sources as good or bad.
Looking at rev 122338208 → rev 122346077 (exact confirmation, 2007-04-12 → 2007-04-12): 0 websites were cited more (or newly), 10 less (or dropped). Number of footnotes: 21 → 14. Different websites: 35 → 25.
Mix of citation types: news 82%, web 18% → news 71%, web 29%.
| cited more often | before → after |
|---|---|
| none in top list | |
| cited less often | before → after |
|---|---|
| nydailynews.com | 1 → 0 |
| weeklystandard.com | 1 → 0 |
| inthesetimes.com | 1 → 0 |
| nytimes.com | 1 → 0 |
| blogforamerica.com | 1 → 0 |
| post-gazette.com | 1 → 0 |
| ssl.tnr.com | 1 → 0 |
| time.com | 1 → 0 |
| select.nytimes.com | 1 → 0 |
| commondreams.org | 1 → 0 |
Counted from the article’s own footnotes. We list domains only — we do not call any source trustworthy or untrustworthy.
How the footnotes changed
How the article's own footnotes changed across the rewrite: which websites and books were cited more or less. We only show the mix — we do not rate sources as good or bad.
Looking at rev 1184243041 → rev 1184839521 (exact confirmation, 2023-11-09 → 2023-11-12): 0 websites were cited more (or newly), 53 less (or dropped). Number of footnotes: 511 → 365. Different websites: 155 → 131.
Mix of citation types: web 50%, news 31%, book 11%, journal 8% → web 50%, news 27%, book 13%, journal 10%.
| cited more often | before → after |
|---|---|
| none in top list | |
| cited less often | before → after |
|---|---|
| cnn.com | 30 → 13 |
| nytimes.com | 35 → 21 |
| pewresearch.org | 23 → 14 |
| pollingreport.com | 10 → 2 |
| books.google.com | 20 → 15 |
| politico.com | 11 → 6 |
| washingtonpost.com | 20 → 16 |
| theatlantic.com | 11 → 7 |
| secular.org | 4 → 0 |
| reuters.com | 5 → 2 |
| aaiusa.org | 3 → 0 |
| npr.org | 10 → 7 |
Counted from the article’s own footnotes. We list domains only — we do not call any source trustworthy or untrustworthy.
Versions we used
These are the exact public Wikipedia versions behind the checks on this page. Open any link to read the original. Wikidata item: Q29552.
| language | comparison point | article title | version | when | text used (chars) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| en | saved | Democratic Party (United States) | open version 1367714418 | 2026-08-04T19:07:10Z | 88,518 |
| es | saved | Partido Demócrata (Estados Unidos) | open version 173923371 | 2026-06-13T10:32:21Z | 69,026 |
| uk | saved | Демократична партія США | open version 48497972 | 2026-08-04T13:30:17Z | 58,180 |