← Back to all analyses

Politics & ideology

Socialism

4 confirmed rewrite episodes; the largest by persistence-weighted mass had a 37.2% durable-spine drop.

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 ↗
Confirmed rewrite episodes
4 confirmed

Largest by persistence-weighted mass: 37.2% durable-spine drop. See Rewrite for exact revision receipts.

Wording
wording barely shifted

Which words grew or shrank is listed under Vocabulary.

Footnotes
0 sites grew · 66 shrank

Different websites cited: 165 → 116. We do not rate those sites. See Citations.

Who wrote today’s text?

Half of the wording still on the page is about 5.7 years old or newer. 22.2% was written in the last 3 years. The ten most active accounts wrote 79.0% of what is there now (a fairly small group of accounts wrote much of the current text; 427 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: Rewrite, Vocabulary, Citations, Framing, Facts, Versions.

4 confirmed rewrite episodeA bounded window in which established wording was substantially replaced.s

Events bounded by stable revisions where long-lived wording was substantially replaced.

Snapshot corpus through 2026-01-01 (revision 1330743304).

Candidates and exact outcomes

The detector scored 23 interval rows and sent 4 candidate windows to exact checking: 4 confirmed, 0 rejected. A candidate window can span multiple interval rows, so rows marked as candidates do not equal the rewrite episode count.

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. 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. 2 · Interval scoring23 intervals scoredThe bars below show persistence-weighted wording loss for each interval.
  3. 3 · Exact checkA revision-level test of whether a candidate window's durable spine collapsed.4 rewrite episodes confirmedRevision-level checking found the required durable wording replacement.
  • 2003-01-01Loss 7.5%, Gain 70.0%, Replacement lead 7.5%71 removed · 664 added PWRDescriptive anomaly: below exact-check floor
  • 2004-01-01Loss 98.7%, Gain 23.7%, Replacement lead 23.7%2,388 removed · 573 added PWRConfirmed candidate window: 2003-01-01 → 2004-01-01
  • 2005-01-01Loss 78.0%, Gain 1577.6%, Replacement lead 78.0%487 removed · 9,844 added PWRDescriptive anomaly: below exact-check floor
  • 2006-01-01Loss 41.1%, Gain 25.5%, Replacement lead 25.5%4,147 removed · 2,575 added PWRConfirmed candidate window: 2005-01-01 → 2008-01-01
  • 2007-01-01Loss 90.0%, Gain 39.8%, Replacement lead 39.8%12,935 removed · 5,720 added PWRConfirmed candidate window: 2005-01-01 → 2008-01-01
  • 2008-01-01Loss 46.8%, Gain 125.5%, Replacement lead 46.8%3,762 removed · 10,099 added PWRConfirmed candidate window: 2005-01-01 → 2008-01-01
  • 2010-01-01Loss 38.0%, Gain 66.4%, Replacement lead 38.0%6,613 removed · 11,549 added PWRExcluded: missing source coverage
  • 2011-01-01Loss 27.9%, Gain 37.4%, Replacement lead 27.9%8,329 removed · 11,179 added PWRConfirmed candidate window: 2010-01-01 → 2011-01-01
  • 2012-01-01Loss 15.0%, Gain 13.6%, Replacement lead 13.6%6,858 removed · 6,234 added PWRMeasured anomaly: exact check pending
  • 2013-01-01Loss 13.9%, Gain 14.0%, Replacement lead 13.9%9,061 removed · 9,103 added PWRMeasured anomaly: exact check pending
  • 2014-01-01Loss 12.9%, Gain 16.1%, Replacement lead 12.9%11,189 removed · 13,989 added PWRMeasured anomaly: exact check pending
  • 2015-01-01Loss 15.1%, Gain 22.1%, Replacement lead 15.1%17,454 removed · 25,515 added PWRMeasured anomaly: exact check pending
  • 2016-01-01Loss 8.6%, Gain 5.6%, Replacement lead 5.6%13,525 removed · 8,759 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
  • 2017-01-01Loss 2.7%, Gain 3.6%, Replacement lead 2.7%5,499 removed · 7,352 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
  • 2018-01-01Loss 3.5%, Gain 1.3%, Replacement lead 1.3%9,319 removed · 3,505 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
  • 2019-01-01Loss 3.2%, Gain 1.6%, Replacement lead 1.6%10,177 removed · 5,140 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
  • 2020-01-01Loss 1.4%, Gain 2.1%, Replacement lead 1.4%5,317 removed · 7,910 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
  • 2021-01-01Loss 10.1%, Gain 3.1%, Replacement lead 3.1%45,277 removed · 14,132 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
  • 2022-01-01Loss 17.4%, Gain 2.0%, Replacement lead 2.0%83,844 removed · 9,452 added PWRMeasured anomaly: exact check pending
  • 2023-01-01Loss 9.8%, Gain 3.2%, Replacement lead 3.2%46,620 removed · 15,092 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
  • 2024-01-01Loss 3.6%, Gain 2.1%, Replacement lead 2.1%18,116 removed · 10,610 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
  • 2025-01-01Loss 37.0%, Gain 1.0%, Replacement lead 1.0%213,137 removed · 5,895 added PWRConfirmed candidate window: 2024-01-01 → 2025-01-01
  • 2026-01-01Loss 2.2%, Gain 0.8%, Replacement lead 0.8%9,439 removed · 3,432 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed

Exact candidate decisions

Every coarse lead and its revision-level decision, including rejected candidates. RedlinesA before-and-after view showing wording removed and added. compare the full candidate window.

Candidate windowExact outcomeCoarse signal
2003-01-01 → 2004-01-01Redline unavailableConfirmed: 98.5% durable-spine dropExact pair: 2003-07-03T13:20:49Z2003-07-05T01:55:59Z · 36.6 hourscoarse interval · 99% persistence-weighted loss · 2,388 PWR massThe absolute persistence-weighted amount of text lost.
2005-01-01 → 2008-01-01Redline unavailableConfirmed: 95.6% durable-spine dropExact pair: 2006-05-23T08:10:15Z2006-05-24T12:03:55Z · 27.9 hourscoarse interval · 90% persistence-weighted loss · 20,844 PWR massThe absolute persistence-weighted amount of text lost.
2010-01-01 → 2011-01-01Redline unavailableConfirmed: 31.3% durable-spine dropExact pair: 2010-10-01T18:59:27Z2010-10-02T21:49:02Z · 26.8 hourscoarse interval · 28% persistence-weighted loss · 8,329 PWR massThe absolute persistence-weighted amount of text lost.
2024-01-01 → 2025-01-01Redline unavailableConfirmed: 37.2% durable-spine dropExact pair: 2024-06-26T16:32:06Z2024-06-28T22:23:33Z · 53.9 hourscoarse interval · 37% persistence-weighted loss · 213,137 PWR massThe absolute persistence-weighted amount of text lost.

Exact-event attribution: revisions 1231127385 → 1231548542

31,985 tokensOne tracked unit of text, usually a word or punctuation mark. removed · 576 surviving replacement tokens · Tpbradbury was associated with 100.0% of removals · Tpbradbury was the origin author of 100.0% of surviving replacement text.

Exact-event attribution: revisions 54672691 → 54876527

12,922 tokensOne tracked unit of text, usually a word or punctuation mark. removed · 3,814 surviving replacement tokens · 172 was associated with 100.0% of removals · 172 was the origin author of 100.0% of surviving replacement text.

Exact-event attribution: revisions 388146182 → 388354075

1,394 tokensOne tracked unit of text, usually a word or punctuation mark. removed · 123 surviving replacement tokens · Johnfos was associated with 100.0% of removals · Johnfos was the origin author of 100.0% of surviving replacement text.

Exact-event attribution: revisions 1113767 → 1114986

1,549 tokensOne tracked unit of text, usually a word or punctuation mark. removed · 1,427 surviving replacement tokens · 209.226.106.78 was associated with 100.0% of removals · 209.226.106.78 was the origin author of 100.0% of surviving replacement text.

Attribution describes public revision-history associations and origin authorship. It does not establish bias, motive, or misconduct.

Confirmed event
Event 1 of 4

Which words grew or shrank?

Words that became more common or less common between the compared versions. Handy for noticing a shift in topic or tone — not a score of bias.

Comparing rev 1113767 -> rev 1114986 (exact confirmation). Rough word count: 805 → 824. Overall: wording changed a lot.

Used more afterward

  • system0 → 7
  • leninist0 → 6
  • soviet0 → 5
  • believe0 → 4
  • described0 → 4
  • planning0 → 4
  • argue0 → 3
  • central0 → 3
  • critics0 → 3
  • description0 → 3
  • economics0 → 3
  • essentially0 → 3

Used less afterward

  • parties7 → 0
  • support6 → 0
  • world6 → 0
  • call5 → 0
  • china5 → 0
  • word5 → 0
  • pure4 → 0
  • regulation4 → 0
  • bellamy3 → 0
  • consider3 → 0
  • example3 → 0
  • forms3 → 0

These are the standout words, not a full dictionary of the article. Boring markup words are filtered out. Treat this as a hint, not a conclusion.

Confirmed event
Event 1 of 4

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 1113767 → rev 1114986 (exact confirmation, 2003-07-03 → 2003-07-05): 0 websites were cited more (or newly), 0 less (or dropped). Number of footnotes: 0 → 0. Different websites: 0 → 0.

Mix of citation types: .

cited more oftenbefore → after
none in top list
cited less oftenbefore → after
none in top list

Counted from the article’s own footnotes. We list domains only — we do not call any source trustworthy or untrustworthy.

Confirmed event
Event 1 of 4

Cross-language lead comparison

How the opening of the article presents the topic in different languages. Disagreement is a reason to read carefully, not a final answer.

Insufficient matched historical content.

Compared matched historical revisions around the confirmed rewrite from 2003-01-01 to 2004-01-01.

Languages compared: en.

Version receipts: en: en before / en after

No comparison result is available for this run.

Confirmed event
Event 1 of 4

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: Q7272.

languagecomparison pointarticle titleversionwhentext used (chars)
enbeforeSocialismopen version 12311273852024-06-26T16:32:06Z3,000
enafterSocialismopen version 12315485422024-06-28T22:23:33Z3,000
frbeforeSocialismeopen version 2160794582024-06-19T16:08:32Z3,000
frafterSocialismeopen version 2174704242024-08-07T17:51:45Z3,000
ptbeforeSocialismoopen version 676877582024-03-26T17:56:06Z3,000
ptafterSocialismoopen version 682110422024-07-01T13:05:26Z3,000