Here's an interesting thing about Wikipedia. Contributors are largely pseudonymous. They are definitely not anonymous. Even a seemingly-random IPv6 address is

Here's an interesting thing about Wikipedia. Contributors are largely pseudonymous. They are definitely not anonymous. Even a seemingly-random IPv6 address is a--temporary--pseudonym for an editor. But editors there rely on reputation, and reputation is gained and maintained through a stable pseudonymous account. However, a small fraction of Wikipedians reveal their true identities right on their user page. Many of them have had real life encounters and represent the WMF in various gatherings and meetings. Others simply don't see a need for a veil of secrecy. For pseudonymous Wikipedians, there is the spectre of "unsolicited paid editing" or UPE, which is a facet of the "conflict of interest" (COI) controversy. For example, if I worked for example.com, I would be strongly encouraged to disclose that affiliation on my user page, and also strongly discouraged from directly editing articles about example.com itself. But, Wikipedians are not required to "out" themselves entirely. So how to declare all COIs without outing yourself? There's a definite tension there that simply can't be resolved, so long as editors are accustomed to a veil of pseudonymity. Everything every editor does on Wikipedia is essentially public record. Every comment you make, every edit to articles, every action taken against your account, it's logged and published to the world. So, it should not be unexpected when pseudonymity is broken and the veil is pierced. PII is supposed to remain private and closely guarded, but everyone should know, everything leaks eventually. And users should always keep that in mind when taking on activities on a public website.