KCB201 Week 11 Slidecast: Wikipedia

Slide 1: c re a tiv e in d u s trie s Wikipedia Dr Axel Bruns KCB201 Virtual Cultures a.bruns@qut.edu.au creativeindustries.qut.com

Slide 2: c re a tiv e in d u s trie s What Is Wikipedia? ‒ Wikipedia: • collaboratively edited online encyclopaedia, in hundreds of languages • ‘anyone can edit’: (almost) all pages can be edited on the fly by any visitor • edit histories and discussion pages available for all entries • content creation process organised ad hoc by contributors • some more permanent structures emerging over time: welcoming parties, administrators, vandalism police, etc. • a self-organising knowledge space driven by collective intelligence? creativeindustries.qut.com

Slide 3: c re a tiv e in d u s trie s Wikipedia’s Pre-History ‒ Nupedia: • project for a quality online encyclopaedia, created and edited by experts • started in 2000 by Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger • slow and laborious editing process with complex quality controls • closed to public participation and contribution • produced 12 articles “after 18+ months and $250,000” ‒ Wikipedia as last-ditch effort: • using wiki technology for ease of editing • abandoning expert-led production model, and • throwing open the gates to outside participants creativeindustries.qut.com

Slide 4: c re a tiv e in d u s trie s Wikipedia’s Winning Formula ‒ Key factors in Wikipedia’s success: • philosophy of equipotentiality: belief that all participants are equally able to contribute something useful • probabilistic, parallelised: if many contributions can be made at the same time, it is more probable that something useful will be amongst them • granular: ability to make even just very minor edits means very low barriers to participation • shared ownership: absence of editors means that contributors feel more immediately responsible for the overall project ‒ Result: • broader range of participants and contributions • rapid expansion of content, gradual improvement of quality • strong loyalty of enthusiasts for pages on their favourite topics creativeindustries.qut.com

Slide 5: c re a tiv e in d u s trie s Wikipedia’s Core Rules ‒ Three fundamental principles: • Neutral Point of View (NPOV): All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), representing fairly, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. • Verifiability: The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. "Verifiability" in this context means that readers should be able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source. Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. • No Original Research: Wikipedia does not publish original research (OR) or original thought. This includes unpublished facts, arguments, speculation, and ideas; and any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position. This means that Wikipedia is not the place to publish your own opinions or experiences. creativeindustries.qut.com

Slide 6: c re a tiv e in d u s trie s Wikipedia as an Encyclopaedia ‒ What does Wikipedia contain? • representations of knowledge – not knowledge itself ∘ verifiable, but not necessarily ‘truthful’ information • collective intelligence in process – not fixed meanings ∘ Wikipedia entries are constantly under construction, and open for debate – they are never complete or finished • content on a broad range of topics ∘ from quantum physics to Star Trek trivia, but without one detracting from the other • self-organising communities of contributors ∘ focussed on building up ‘their’ part of the Wikipedia knowledge base, and engaging with one another (sometimes controversially) • Is Wikipedia an encyclopaedia, then? creativeindustries.qut.com

Slide 7: c re a tiv e in d u s trie s Criticism of Wikipedia ‒ Robert McHenry (former Britannica editor): To put the Wikipedia method in its simplest terms: 1. Anyone, irrespective of expertise in or even familiarity with the topic, can submit an article and it will be published. 2. Anyone, irrespective of expertise in or even familiarity with the topic, can edit that article, and the modifications will stand until further modified. Then comes the crucial and entirely faith-based step: 3. Some unspecified quasi-Darwinian process will assure that those writings and editings by contributors of greatest expertise will survive; articles will eventually reach a steady state that corresponds to the highest degree of accuracy. Does someone actually believe this? Evidently so. Why? It’s very hard to say. ‒ But against this, see Aaron Krowne (in Free Software Magazine): • An important underlying theme of McHenry’s piece is his repeated harping on the fact that you “never really know” if a Wikipedia article is true, and his jeering at the Wikipedia community for honestly admitting this. Simultaneously, he utterly ignores the fact that this is also the case for traditional encyclopedias. creativeindustries.qut.com