[WikiEN-l] Hi there, everybody!

[stevertigo]

On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 7:02 AM, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at fairpoint.net> wrote:

> > However, I am becoming more
> > interested in the "social" aspect of wikipedia, which is why I joined
> > the list!
>

I like where Fred is going here. But do I understand correctly, Emily, that
by "social aspects" you mean more what we might call "community," or
"collective," or perhaps "synergetic" aspects? My/our apparent
confusion/misunderstanding comes from the unfortunate fact that for many
people here, the word "social" is a kind of codeword for "community
interactions that have no aspect of the purpose of writing an encyclopedia
in mind."

Everyone is to some degree interested in "community," and that's why
Wikipedia works. But the connection between "social aspects" and community,
though essential, is still not yet well understood. Hence its my sense (?)
that many people think that "if the idea doesn't have the encyclopedia in
mind," it therefore must be "social," (discarded), often quite with little
regard for whether or not that "social" idea contributes to "community."
But, as with anything dynamic, there is a ongoing struggle to find a balance
between different forces.

If your interested, you might even do a little research into the history of
how social aspects have tried to coexist with the prime directive of
building (and even writing) an encyclopedia. Maybe writing up a meta page
about that history would help people get an overview. Places to look:
Barnstars, Userboxes, IRC and Meetups (after Geni), Projects (of course),
and Medcom / other WP:DRR, and Signpost (late addition). Maybe after
checking these out you can have an idea or two of your own.

You may be interested to know that there have been times when people have
been quite at odds about the "social aspects." Search "userboxes" + "wheel
war" for example --a very important example of when the "community" decided
(somehow) to stomp on the "society." I still consider the mass removal of
userboxes from the meta namespace to the user namespace to have been a
"social" faux pax.

To wrap this up, people-oriented people have always helped very much to
create a more integrated community. Those that get themselves involved in
content issues often help to keep things from blowing up. And some have even
been entrusted by the community to positions of authority.

-Steve

You sound like a wonderful addition to our community. One of the problems
> we might have (others may disagree) is that the social side of Wikipedia
> is somewhat underdeveloped. That is certainly a legitimate topic of
> discussion on this list: how we might make Wikipedia a friendlier, more
> welcoming place.
>


> I first found Wikipedia in 2002, back in the days when articles like
> "Colorado" had not even been started. There was this guy, Larry Sanger,
> who while not in charge, had a lot of clout. And Jimmy Wales, was very
> hands on, following developments closely.
>