Mark Graham and I are co-chairs of the Wikipedia Track at next year's WikiSym conference (now with added OpenSym!) and we're preparing the call for papers to go out Friday week. There has been such great discussion on this list in the past about what is currently missing from Wikipedia research that I thought I'd send our draft to you in case there are items that you think we might add? Our current suggestions below:
• What do particular articles or groups or articles tell us about the norms, governance and architecture of Wikipedia and its impact on media, politics and the social sphere? How is information on Wikipedia being shaped by the materiality of Wikipedia infrastructure?
• What is the impact of all/some of Wikipedia’s 211 language editions having on achieving the project’s goal to represent the “sum of all human knowledge”? Do smaller language editions follow the same development path as larger language editions? Can different representations in different languages tell us anything about cultural, national or regional differences?
• What are the methodological challenges to studying Wikipedia? How are researchers engaging with innovative methodologies to solve some of these problems? How are other researchers using traditional or well-established methods to study Wikipedia?
• How are wiki projects other than Wikipedia evolving? What are the benefits to studying other wiki projects and can comparisons and generalisations be made from our observations of these systems?
• How does information contained in Wikipedia shape our understanding of broader social, economic, and political practices and processes? What theoretical frameworks in social, economic, legal and other relevant theoretical traditions can be applied to enrich the academic discourse on Wikipedia?
Also really looking forward to some great papers next year. We think that it's a really good thing that Wikipedia research has a separate track next year and we're hoping that it's going to really strengthen the quality of research. Looking forward to any suggestions you might have.
Best, Heather.
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
Hello!
Thank you Heather for the note!. The call looks interesting to me, but I would suggest to add gender inclusion as a topic at the call for paper, as it is a central problem in Wikipedia.
Additionally, I would encourage the organizers of Wikisym 2013 to make an extra effort in order to assure engaging women in the conference. In 2012, the organizers of Wikisym were highly predominantly male: 89% of the Symposium Committee, 78% of the Program Committee, and 80% of the program of speakers were men (according to the data provided at http://www.wikisym.org/ws2012/bin/view/Main/Schedule). While other technological related conference (such as OK Fest and Personal Democracy Forum) are able to engage a better gender balance (data provided here: http://wiki.digital-commons.net/Gender).
In case it could he of help, this wiki collect best practices to engage women in technology related conferences and list of women experts: http://wiki.digital-commons.net/Gender
The WikiWomen's Collaborative wiki might also be a useful resource: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:WikiWomen%27s_Collaborative
Thank you again. Have a nice day! Mayo
«·´`·.(*·.¸(`·.¸ ¸.·´)¸.·*).·´`·» «·´¨*·¸¸« Mayo Fuster Morell ».¸.·*¨`·» @Lilaroja «·´`·.(¸.·´(¸.·* *·.¸)`·.¸).·´`·»
Fellow. Berkman Center for Internet and Society. Harvard University. Researcher. Institute of Government and Public Policies. Autonomous University of Barcelona. Ph.D European University Institute
Website: http://www.onlinecreation.info ________________________________________ From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] on behalf of Heather Ford [hfordsa@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 8:34 PM To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities Cc: Mark Graham Subject: [Wiki-research-l] advice on Wikipedia topics for WikiSym 2013
Mark Graham and I are co-chairs of the Wikipedia Track at next year's WikiSym conference (now with added OpenSym!) and we're preparing the call for papers to go out Friday week. There has been such great discussion on this list in the past about what is currently missing from Wikipedia research that I thought I'd send our draft to you in case there are items that you think we might add? Our current suggestions below:
• What do particular articles or groups or articles tell us about the norms, governance and architecture of Wikipedia and its impact on media, politics and the social sphere? How is information on Wikipedia being shaped by the materiality of Wikipedia infrastructure?
• What is the impact of all/some of Wikipedia’s 211 language editions having on achieving the project’s goal to represent the “sum of all human knowledge”? Do smaller language editions follow the same development path as larger language editions? Can different representations in different languages tell us anything about cultural, national or regional differences?
• What are the methodological challenges to studying Wikipedia? How are researchers engaging with innovative methodologies to solve some of these problems? How are other researchers using traditional or well-established methods to study Wikipedia?
• How are wiki projects other than Wikipedia evolving? What are the benefits to studying other wiki projects and can comparisons and generalisations be made from our observations of these systems?
• How does information contained in Wikipedia shape our understanding of broader social, economic, and political practices and processes? What theoretical frameworks in social, economic, legal and other relevant theoretical traditions can be applied to enrich the academic discourse on Wikipedia?
Also really looking forward to some great papers next year. We think that it's a really good thing that Wikipedia research has a separate track next year and we're hoping that it's going to really strengthen the quality of research. Looking forward to any suggestions you might have.
Best, Heather.
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
_______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Fuster, Mayo Mayo.Fuster@eui.eu wrote:
Hello!
Thank you Heather for the note!. The call looks interesting to me, but I would suggest to add gender inclusion as a topic at the call for paper, as it is a central problem in Wikipedia.
+1
Mark Graham and I are co-chairs of the Wikipedia Track at next year's WikiSym conference (now with added OpenSym!) and we're preparing the call for papers to go out Friday week.
This might sound like a strawman proposal, or facetious or something, but it's not. Let's simply call it a crazy subversive proposal. How about organizing the Wikipedia Track as an anti-Wikipedia track?
There has been such great discussion on this list in the past about what is currently missing from Wikipedia research
Yes, and this is a major sub-point: the main thing missing from Wikipedia research is non-Wikipedia research.
One notable exception, I think, is Benjamin Mako Hill's "Almost Wikipedia" talk. But I think this talk only starts a process of inquiry. It's not just "failed Wikipedias" but "successful non-Wikipedias" that need to be highlighted and compared to Wikipedia itself.
In short, the purpose would be to engage in scholarly, "inciteful", Wikipedia-bashing. What is irreparably flawed in the design? (More politely: if we were to do it all over again, what would we do differently?) Why is it so unappealing to potential women editors (per above)? What are the other outstanding failures of Wikipedia?
Along with this initiative, I suggest inviting Domas Mituzas (http://www.flickr.com/photos/fuzheado/228629484/) to give a keynote.
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 8:42 PM, Joe Corneli holtzermann17@gmail.com wrote:
Along with this initiative, I suggest inviting Domas Mituzas (http://www.flickr.com/photos/fuzheado/228629484/) to give a keynote.
Another nice point of reference: http://xkcd.com/214/
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 10:10 PM, Joe Corneli holtzermann17@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 8:42 PM, Joe Corneli holtzermann17@gmail.com wrote:
Along with this initiative, I suggest inviting Domas Mituzas (http://www.flickr.com/photos/fuzheado/228629484/) to give a keynote.
Another nice point of reference: http://xkcd.com/214/
Has anyone actually done a clickstream analysis of Wikipedia?
Daniel
Wonderful suggestions, Joe!
It's not just "failed Wikipedias" but "successful non-Wikipedias" that need to be highlighted and compared to Wikipedia itself.
As someone who is doing their DPhil on deleted pages and banned users on Wikipedia, I think this is a glorious idea :) I am going to try and construct a good paragraph about critical research being welcomed and talk more with our CPOV group about this based on your suggestions and comments below.
In short, the purpose would be to engage in scholarly, "inciteful", Wikipedia-bashing. What is irreparably flawed in the design? (More politely: if we were to do it all over again, what would we do differently?) Why is it so unappealing to potential women editors (per above)? What are the other outstanding failures of Wikipedia?
Along with this initiative, I suggest inviting Domas Mituzas (http://www.flickr.com/photos/fuzheado/228629484/) to give a keynote.
Ok! Will send onto the organizing committee. Any particular things I should add with the note about why he would be suited?
Best, Heather.
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 10:26 PM, Heather Ford hfordsa@gmail.com wrote:
Ok! Will send onto the organizing committee. Any particular things I should add with the note about why he would be suited?
I think he's in a somewhat unique position to be able to talk with authority about both the technology and cultural aspects of Wikipedia (http://domasmituzas.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/velocity2008-wikipedia.pdf). I think that if people are going to do effective research on Wikipedia, they clearly need to take both of these aspects into account. Finally, he's attended Wikimania with a "troll" badge for some years and I think should be invited to make an appearance at WikiSym in the same capacity. The research community would benefit from this sort of jester-like wit as much or more than the mainstream Wikistas.
Thank you, Mayo :)
I think one of the problems with WikiSym - especially the research tracks - is that it is (mostly) an academic conference and so is almost entirely dependent on the academic pool (+ funding challenges etc) for participants. That said, we're co-located with Wikimania this year which means that hopefully we can draw from a larger group of practitioners and researchers.
I'll definitely reach out to the WikiWomen's Collective and hopefully with enough time to plan ahead, we'll be able to engage more women in next year's event!
Thanks again for your suggestions.
Best, Heather.
On Nov 23, 2012, at 7:57 PM, Fuster, Mayo wrote:
Hello!
Thank you Heather for the note!. The call looks interesting to me, but I would suggest to add gender inclusion as a topic at the call for paper, as it is a central problem in Wikipedia.
Additionally, I would encourage the organizers of Wikisym 2013 to make an extra effort in order to assure engaging women in the conference. In 2012, the organizers of Wikisym were highly predominantly male: 89% of the Symposium Committee, 78% of the Program Committee, and 80% of the program of speakers were men (according to the data provided at http://www.wikisym.org/ws2012/bin/view/Main/Schedule). While other technological related conference (such as OK Fest and Personal Democracy Forum) are able to engage a better gender balance (data provided here: http://wiki.digital-commons.net/Gender).
In case it could he of help, this wiki collect best practices to engage women in technology related conferences and list of women experts: http://wiki.digital-commons.net/Gender
The WikiWomen's Collaborative wiki might also be a useful resource: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:WikiWomen%27s_Collaborative
Thank you again. Have a nice day! Mayo
«·´`·.(*·.¸(`·.¸ ¸.·´)¸.·*).·´`·»«·´¨*·¸¸« Mayo Fuster Morell ».¸.·*¨`·» @Lilaroja «·´`·.(¸.·´(¸.·* *·.¸)`·.¸).·´`·»
Fellow. Berkman Center for Internet and Society. Harvard University. Researcher. Institute of Government and Public Policies. Autonomous University of Barcelona. Ph.D European University Institute
Website: http://www.onlinecreation.info ________________________________________ From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] on behalf of Heather Ford [hfordsa@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 8:34 PM To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities Cc: Mark Graham Subject: [Wiki-research-l] advice on Wikipedia topics for WikiSym 2013
Mark Graham and I are co-chairs of the Wikipedia Track at next year's WikiSym conference (now with added OpenSym!) and we're preparing the call for papers to go out Friday week. There has been such great discussion on this list in the past about what is currently missing from Wikipedia research that I thought I'd send our draft to you in case there are items that you think we might add? Our current suggestions below:
• What do particular articles or groups or articles tell us about the norms, governance and architecture of Wikipedia and its impact on media, politics and the social sphere? How is information on Wikipedia being shaped by the materiality of Wikipedia infrastructure? • What is the impact of all/some of Wikipedia’s 211 language editions having on achieving the project’s goal to represent the “sum of all human knowledge”? Do smaller language editions follow the same development path as larger language editions? Can different representations in different languages tell us anything about cultural, national or regional differences? • What are the methodological challenges to studying Wikipedia? How are researchers engaging with innovative methodologies to solve some of these problems? How are other researchers using traditional or well-established methods to study Wikipedia? • How are wiki projects other than Wikipedia evolving? What are the benefits to studying other wiki projects and can comparisons and generalisations be made from our observations of these systems? • How does information contained in Wikipedia shape our understanding of broader social, economic, and political practices and processes? What theoretical frameworks in social, economic, legal and other relevant theoretical traditions can be applied to enrich the academic discourse on Wikipedia?Also really looking forward to some great papers next year. We think that it's a really good thing that Wikipedia research has a separate track next year and we're hoping that it's going to really strengthen the quality of research. Looking forward to any suggestions you might have.
Best, Heather.
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
Great! Thank you Heather.
You did not make reference in your reply to it so it is difficult to know if you consider it, but I still think adding gender question into the call for papers would be a good idea.
Thank you again. Cheers! Mayo
«·´`·.(*·.¸(`·.¸ ¸.·´)¸.·*).·´`·» «·´¨*·¸¸« Mayo Fuster Morell ».¸.·*¨`·» @Lilaroja «·´`·.(¸.·´(¸.·* *·.¸)`·.¸).·´`·»
Fellow. Berkman Center for Internet and Society. Harvard University. Researcher. Institute of Government and Public Policies. Autonomous University of Barcelona. Ph.D European University Institute
Website: http://www.onlinecreation.info ________________________________________ From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] on behalf of Heather Ford [hfordsa@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 11:32 PM To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities Cc: Mark Graham Subject: Re: [Wiki-research-l] advice on Wikipedia topics for WikiSym 2013
Thank you, Mayo :)
I think one of the problems with WikiSym - especially the research tracks - is that it is (mostly) an academic conference and so is almost entirely dependent on the academic pool (+ funding challenges etc) for participants. That said, we're co-located with Wikimania this year which means that hopefully we can draw from a larger group of practitioners and researchers.
I'll definitely reach out to the WikiWomen's Collective and hopefully with enough time to plan ahead, we'll be able to engage more women in next year's event!
Thanks again for your suggestions.
Best, Heather.
On Nov 23, 2012, at 7:57 PM, Fuster, Mayo wrote:
Hello!
Thank you Heather for the note!. The call looks interesting to me, but I would suggest to add gender inclusion as a topic at the call for paper, as it is a central problem in Wikipedia.
Additionally, I would encourage the organizers of Wikisym 2013 to make an extra effort in order to assure engaging women in the conference. In 2012, the organizers of Wikisym were highly predominantly male: 89% of the Symposium Committee, 78% of the Program Committee, and 80% of the program of speakers were men (according to the data provided at http://www.wikisym.org/ws2012/bin/view/Main/Schedule). While other technological related conference (such as OK Fest and Personal Democracy Forum) are able to engage a better gender balance (data provided here: http://wiki.digital-commons.net/Gender).
In case it could he of help, this wiki collect best practices to engage women in technology related conferences and list of women experts: http://wiki.digital-commons.net/Gender
The WikiWomen's Collaborative wiki might also be a useful resource: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:WikiWomen%27s_Collaborative
Thank you again. Have a nice day! Mayo
«·´`·.(*·.¸(`·.¸ ¸.·´)¸.·*).·´`·» «·´¨*·¸¸« Mayo Fuster Morell ».¸.·*¨`·» @Lilaroja «·´`·.(¸.·´(¸.·* *·.¸)`·.¸).·´`·»
Fellow. Berkman Center for Internet and Society. Harvard University. Researcher. Institute of Government and Public Policies. Autonomous University of Barcelona. Ph.D European University Institute
Website: http://www.onlinecreation.info ________________________________________ From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.orgmailto:wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] on behalf of Heather Ford [hfordsa@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 8:34 PM To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities Cc: Mark Graham Subject: [Wiki-research-l] advice on Wikipedia topics for WikiSym 2013
Mark Graham and I are co-chairs of the Wikipedia Track at next year's WikiSym conference (now with added OpenSym!) and we're preparing the call for papers to go out Friday week. There has been such great discussion on this list in the past about what is currently missing from Wikipedia research that I thought I'd send our draft to you in case there are items that you think we might add? Our current suggestions below:
• What do particular articles or groups or articles tell us about the norms, governance and architecture of Wikipedia and its impact on media, politics and the social sphere? How is information on Wikipedia being shaped by the materiality of Wikipedia infrastructure?
• What is the impact of all/some of Wikipedia’s 211 language editions having on achieving the project’s goal to represent the “sum of all human knowledge”? Do smaller language editions follow the same development path as larger language editions? Can different representations in different languages tell us anything about cultural, national or regional differences?
• What are the methodological challenges to studying Wikipedia? How are researchers engaging with innovative methodologies to solve some of these problems? How are other researchers using traditional or well-established methods to study Wikipedia?
• How are wiki projects other than Wikipedia evolving? What are the benefits to studying other wiki projects and can comparisons and generalisations be made from our observations of these systems?
• How does information contained in Wikipedia shape our understanding of broader social, economic, and political practices and processes? What theoretical frameworks in social, economic, legal and other relevant theoretical traditions can be applied to enrich the academic discourse on Wikipedia?
Also really looking forward to some great papers next year. We think that it's a really good thing that Wikipedia research has a separate track next year and we're hoping that it's going to really strengthen the quality of research. Looking forward to any suggestions you might have.
Best, Heather.
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.nethttp://www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
_______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
_______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.nethttp://www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
On Nov 25, 2012, at 3:56 PM, Fuster, Mayo wrote:
Great! Thank you Heather.
You did not make reference in your reply to it so it is difficult to know if you consider it,
Oh, sorry - we definitely will be adding it! Thanks!
but I still think adding gender question into the call for papers would be a good idea.
Thank you again. Cheers! Mayo
«·´`·.(*·.¸(`·.¸ ¸.·´)¸.·*).·´`·»«·´¨*·¸¸« Mayo Fuster Morell ».¸.·*¨`·» @Lilaroja «·´`·.(¸.·´(¸.·* *·.¸)`·.¸).·´`·»
Fellow. Berkman Center for Internet and Society. Harvard University. Researcher. Institute of Government and Public Policies. Autonomous University of Barcelona. Ph.D European University Institute
Website: http://www.onlinecreation.info ________________________________________ From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] on behalf of Heather Ford [hfordsa@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 11:32 PM To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities Cc: Mark Graham Subject: Re: [Wiki-research-l] advice on Wikipedia topics for WikiSym 2013
Thank you, Mayo :)
I think one of the problems with WikiSym - especially the research tracks - is that it is (mostly) an academic conference and so is almost entirely dependent on the academic pool (+ funding challenges etc) for participants. That said, we're co-located with Wikimania this year which means that hopefully we can draw from a larger group of practitioners and researchers.
I'll definitely reach out to the WikiWomen's Collective and hopefully with enough time to plan ahead, we'll be able to engage more women in next year's event!
Thanks again for your suggestions.
Best, Heather.
On Nov 23, 2012, at 7:57 PM, Fuster, Mayo wrote:
Hello!
Thank you Heather for the note!. The call looks interesting to me, but I would suggest to add gender inclusion as a topic at the call for paper, as it is a central problem in Wikipedia.
Additionally, I would encourage the organizers of Wikisym 2013 to make an extra effort in order to assure engaging women in the conference. In 2012, the organizers of Wikisym were highly predominantly male: 89% of the Symposium Committee, 78% of the Program Committee, and 80% of the program of speakers were men (according to the data provided at http://www.wikisym.org/ws2012/bin/view/Main/Schedule). While other technological related conference (such as OK Fest and Personal Democracy Forum) are able to engage a better gender balance (data provided here: http://wiki.digital-commons.net/Gender).
In case it could he of help, this wiki collect best practices to engage women in technology related conferences and list of women experts: http://wiki.digital-commons.net/Gender
The WikiWomen's Collaborative wiki might also be a useful resource: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:WikiWomen%27s_Collaborative
Thank you again. Have a nice day! Mayo
«·´`·.(*·.¸(`·.¸ ¸.·´)¸.·*).·´`·»«·´¨*·¸¸« Mayo Fuster Morell ».¸.·*¨`·» @Lilaroja «·´`·.(¸.·´(¸.·* *·.¸)`·.¸).·´`·»
Fellow. Berkman Center for Internet and Society. Harvard University. Researcher. Institute of Government and Public Policies. Autonomous University of Barcelona. Ph.D European University Institute
Website: http://www.onlinecreation.info ________________________________________ From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.orgmailto:wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] on behalf of Heather Ford [hfordsa@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 8:34 PM To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities Cc: Mark Graham Subject: [Wiki-research-l] advice on Wikipedia topics for WikiSym 2013
Mark Graham and I are co-chairs of the Wikipedia Track at next year's WikiSym conference (now with added OpenSym!) and we're preparing the call for papers to go out Friday week. There has been such great discussion on this list in the past about what is currently missing from Wikipedia research that I thought I'd send our draft to you in case there are items that you think we might add? Our current suggestions below:
• What do particular articles or groups or articles tell us about the norms, governance and architecture of Wikipedia and its impact on media, politics and the social sphere? How is information on Wikipedia being shaped by the materiality of Wikipedia infrastructure? • What is the impact of all/some of Wikipedia’s 211 language editions having on achieving the project’s goal to represent the “sum of all human knowledge”? Do smaller language editions follow the same development path as larger language editions? Can different representations in different languages tell us anything about cultural, national or regional differences? • What are the methodological challenges to studying Wikipedia? How are researchers engaging with innovative methodologies to solve some of these problems? How are other researchers using traditional or well-established methods to study Wikipedia? • How are wiki projects other than Wikipedia evolving? What are the benefits to studying other wiki projects and can comparisons and generalisations be made from our observations of these systems? • How does information contained in Wikipedia shape our understanding of broader social, economic, and political practices and processes? What theoretical frameworks in social, economic, legal and other relevant theoretical traditions can be applied to enrich the academic discourse on Wikipedia?Also really looking forward to some great papers next year. We think that it's a really good thing that Wikipedia research has a separate track next year and we're hoping that it's going to really strengthen the quality of research. Looking forward to any suggestions you might have.
Best, Heather.
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.nethttp://www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.nethttp://www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
Is there any interest on adding a topic related to Education? Sorry for insisting on this, but I'd really like to know whether I should focus my efforts on this group or start from the ground - in terms of congresses and journals - in another one.
Juliana.
On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Fuster, Mayo Mayo.Fuster@eui.eu wrote:
Great! Thank you Heather.
You did not make reference in your reply to it so it is difficult to know if you consider it, but I still think adding gender question into the call for papers would be a good idea.
Thank you again. Cheers! Mayo
«·´`·.(*·.¸(`·.¸ ¸.·´)¸.·*).·´`·»«·´¨*·¸¸« Mayo Fuster Morell ».¸.·*¨`·» @Lilaroja «·´`·.(¸.·´(¸.·* *·.¸)`·.¸).·´`·»
Fellow. Berkman Center for Internet and Society. Harvard University. Researcher. Institute of Government and Public Policies. Autonomous University of Barcelona. Ph.D European University Institute
Website: http://www.onlinecreation.info ________________________________________ From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [ wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] on behalf of Heather Ford [ hfordsa@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 11:32 PM To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities Cc: Mark Graham Subject: Re: [Wiki-research-l] advice on Wikipedia topics for WikiSym 2013
Thank you, Mayo :)
I think one of the problems with WikiSym - especially the research tracks
- is that it is (mostly) an academic conference and so is almost entirely
dependent on the academic pool (+ funding challenges etc) for participants. That said, we're co-located with Wikimania this year which means that hopefully we can draw from a larger group of practitioners and researchers.
I'll definitely reach out to the WikiWomen's Collective and hopefully with enough time to plan ahead, we'll be able to engage more women in next year's event!
Thanks again for your suggestions.
Best, Heather.
On Nov 23, 2012, at 7:57 PM, Fuster, Mayo wrote:
Hello!
Thank you Heather for the note!. The call looks interesting to me, but I would suggest to add gender inclusion as a topic at the call for paper, as it is a central problem in Wikipedia.
Additionally, I would encourage the organizers of Wikisym 2013 to make an extra effort in order to assure engaging women in the conference. In 2012, the organizers of Wikisym were highly predominantly male: 89% of the Symposium Committee, 78% of the Program Committee, and 80% of the program of speakers were men (according to the data provided at http://www.wikisym.org/ws2012/bin/view/Main/Schedule). While other technological related conference (such as OK Fest and Personal Democracy Forum) are able to engage a better gender balance (data provided here: http://wiki.digital-commons.net/Gender).
In case it could he of help, this wiki collect best practices to engage women in technology related conferences and list of women experts: http://wiki.digital-commons.net/Gender
The WikiWomen's Collaborative wiki might also be a useful resource: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:WikiWomen%27s_Collaborative
Thank you again. Have a nice day! Mayo
«·´`·.(*·.¸(`·.¸ ¸.·´)¸.·*).·´`·»«·´¨*·¸¸« Mayo Fuster Morell ».¸.·*¨`·» @Lilaroja «·´`·.(¸.·´(¸.·* *·.¸)`·.¸).·´`·»
Fellow. Berkman Center for Internet and Society. Harvard University. Researcher. Institute of Government and Public Policies. Autonomous University of Barcelona. Ph.D European University Institute
Website: http://www.onlinecreation.info ________________________________________ From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.orgmailto: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [ wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] on behalf of Heather Ford [ hfordsa@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 8:34 PM To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities Cc: Mark Graham Subject: [Wiki-research-l] advice on Wikipedia topics for WikiSym 2013
Mark Graham and I are co-chairs of the Wikipedia Track at next year's WikiSym conference (now with added OpenSym!) and we're preparing the call for papers to go out Friday week. There has been such great discussion on this list in the past about what is currently missing from Wikipedia research that I thought I'd send our draft to you in case there are items that you think we might add? Our current suggestions below:
• What do particular articles or groups or articles tell us aboutthe norms, governance and architecture of Wikipedia and its impact on media, politics and the social sphere? How is information on Wikipedia being shaped by the materiality of Wikipedia infrastructure?
• What is the impact of all/some of Wikipedia’s 211 languageeditions having on achieving the project’s goal to represent the “sum of all human knowledge”? Do smaller language editions follow the same development path as larger language editions? Can different representations in different languages tell us anything about cultural, national or regional differences?
• What are the methodological challenges to studying Wikipedia? Howare researchers engaging with innovative methodologies to solve some of these problems? How are other researchers using traditional or well-established methods to study Wikipedia?
• How are wiki projects other than Wikipedia evolving? What are thebenefits to studying other wiki projects and can comparisons and generalisations be made from our observations of these systems?
• How does information contained in Wikipedia shape ourunderstanding of broader social, economic, and political practices and processes? What theoretical frameworks in social, economic, legal and other relevant theoretical traditions can be applied to enrich the academic discourse on Wikipedia?
Also really looking forward to some great papers next year. We think that it's a really good thing that Wikipedia research has a separate track next year and we're hoping that it's going to really strengthen the quality of research. Looking forward to any suggestions you might have.
Best, Heather.
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.nethttp://www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.nethttp://www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Wikis are big in education, so I'm sure educational topics are welcome. There are plenty of educators.
The open collaboration track (wikis in general, not Wikipedia) may be more suitable. Alternatively, for non-reserach work, the community track.
Cheers, Dirk
On 26.11.2012 05:05, Juliana Bastos Marques wrote:
Is there any interest on adding a topic related to Education? Sorry for insisting on this, but I'd really like to know whether I should focus my efforts on this group or start from the ground - in terms of congresses and journals - in another one.
Juliana.
On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Fuster, Mayo <Mayo.Fuster@eui.eu mailto:Mayo.Fuster@eui.eu> wrote:
Great! Thank you Heather. You did not make reference in your reply to it so it is difficult to know if you consider it, but I still think adding gender question into the call for papers would be a good idea. Thank you again. Cheers! Mayo «·´`·.(*·.¸(`·.¸ ¸.·´)¸.·*).·´`·» «·´¨*·¸¸« Mayo Fuster Morell ».¸.·*¨`·» @Lilaroja «·´`·.(¸.·´(¸.·* *·.¸)`·.¸).·´`·» Fellow. Berkman Center for Internet and Society. Harvard University. Researcher. Institute of Government and Public Policies. Autonomous University of Barcelona. Ph.D European University Institute Website: http://www.onlinecreation.info ________________________________________ From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org> [wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org>] on behalf of Heather Ford [hfordsa@gmail.com <mailto:hfordsa@gmail.com>] Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 11:32 PM To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities Cc: Mark Graham Subject: Re: [Wiki-research-l] advice on Wikipedia topics for WikiSym 2013 Thank you, Mayo :) I think one of the problems with WikiSym - especially the research tracks - is that it is (mostly) an academic conference and so is almost entirely dependent on the academic pool (+ funding challenges etc) for participants. That said, we're co-located with Wikimania this year which means that hopefully we can draw from a larger group of practitioners and researchers. I'll definitely reach out to the WikiWomen's Collective and hopefully with enough time to plan ahead, we'll be able to engage more women in next year's event! Thanks again for your suggestions. Best, Heather. On Nov 23, 2012, at 7:57 PM, Fuster, Mayo wrote: Hello! Thank you Heather for the note!. The call looks interesting to me, but I would suggest to add gender inclusion as a topic at the call for paper, as it is a central problem in Wikipedia. Additionally, I would encourage the organizers of Wikisym 2013 to make an extra effort in order to assure engaging women in the conference. In 2012, the organizers of Wikisym were highly predominantly male: 89% of the Symposium Committee, 78% of the Program Committee, and 80% of the program of speakers were men (according to the data provided at http://www.wikisym.org/ws2012/bin/view/Main/Schedule). While other technological related conference (such as OK Fest and Personal Democracy Forum) are able to engage a better gender balance (data provided here: http://wiki.digital-commons.net/Gender). In case it could he of help, this wiki collect best practices to engage women in technology related conferences and list of women experts: http://wiki.digital-commons.net/Gender The WikiWomen's Collaborative wiki might also be a useful resource: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:WikiWomen%27s_Collaborative Thank you again. Have a nice day! Mayo «·´`·.(*·.¸(`·.¸ ¸.·´)¸.·*).·´`·» «·´¨*·¸¸« Mayo Fuster Morell ».¸.·*¨`·» @Lilaroja «·´`·.(¸.·´(¸.·* *·.¸)`·.¸).·´`·» Fellow. Berkman Center for Internet and Society. Harvard University. Researcher. Institute of Government and Public Policies. Autonomous University of Barcelona. Ph.D European University Institute Website: http://www.onlinecreation.info ________________________________________ From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org><mailto:wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org>> [wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org>] on behalf of Heather Ford [hfordsa@gmail.com <mailto:hfordsa@gmail.com>] Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 8:34 PM To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities Cc: Mark Graham Subject: [Wiki-research-l] advice on Wikipedia topics for WikiSym 2013 Mark Graham and I are co-chairs of the Wikipedia Track at next year's WikiSym conference (now with added OpenSym!) and we're preparing the call for papers to go out Friday week. There has been such great discussion on this list in the past about what is currently missing from Wikipedia research that I thought I'd send our draft to you in case there are items that you think we might add? Our current suggestions below: • What do particular articles or groups or articles tell us about the norms, governance and architecture of Wikipedia and its impact on media, politics and the social sphere? How is information on Wikipedia being shaped by the materiality of Wikipedia infrastructure? • What is the impact of all/some of Wikipedia’s 211 language editions having on achieving the project’s goal to represent the “sum of all human knowledge”? Do smaller language editions follow the same development path as larger language editions? Can different representations in different languages tell us anything about cultural, national or regional differences? • What are the methodological challenges to studying Wikipedia? How are researchers engaging with innovative methodologies to solve some of these problems? How are other researchers using traditional or well-established methods to study Wikipedia? • How are wiki projects other than Wikipedia evolving? What are the benefits to studying other wiki projects and can comparisons and generalisations be made from our observations of these systems? • How does information contained in Wikipedia shape our understanding of broader social, economic, and political practices and processes? What theoretical frameworks in social, economic, legal and other relevant theoretical traditions can be applied to enrich the academic discourse on Wikipedia? Also really looking forward to some great papers next year. We think that it's a really good thing that Wikipedia research has a separate track next year and we're hoping that it's going to really strengthen the quality of research. Looking forward to any suggestions you might have. Best, Heather. Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.net <http://www.ethnographymatters.net><http://www.ethnographymatters.net> @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.net <http://www.ethnographymatters.net><http://www.ethnographymatters.net> @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l-- www.domusaurea.org http://www.domusaurea.org
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Thanks so much for your input on the WikiSym CFP! This is the latest draft of the topics section with the addition of 3 extra topics related to gender, education and institutionalisation suggested by members of this list. Remember that these are just ways of inspiring people to think of things to write about or to see their own work represented here. It isn't meant to be comprehensive. Any paper related to Wikipedia research will be reviewed in this track (with broader topics related to open collaboration, open data etc reviewed in other WikiSym + OpenSym topics):
'Topics of interest to the Wikipedia research track include, but are not limited to: • What do particular articles or groups or articles tell us about the norms, governance and architecture of Wikipedia and its impact on media, politics and the social sphere? How is information on Wikipedia being shaped by the materiality of Wikipedia infrastructure? • What is the impact of all/some of Wikipedia’s 211 language editions having on achieving the project’s goal to represent the “sum of all human knowledge”? Do smaller language editions follow the same development path as larger language editions? Can different representations in different languages tell us anything about cultural, national or regional differences? • What are the gender dimensions of Wikipedia editing? How are issues around power, knowledge and representation drawn into focus by gender, geography and other gaps in Wikipedia editing? • What skills/competencies/connections/world views are required to become an empowered member of the Wikimedia community? What would a Wikipedia literate person look like? How might they obtain those skills/competencies/connections/world views? • What is the effect of outreach initiatives involving the growing institutionalisation of Wikipedia activities? As galleries, libraries, archives and museums hire Wikipedians-in-residence to digitize, showcase and/or represent their collections, is Wikipedia able to fill some its key knowledge gaps? Or are there unintended effects of this institutionalization of knowledge? • What are the methodological challenges to studying Wikipedia? How are researchers engaging with innovative methodologies to solve some of these problems? How are other researchers using traditional or well-established methods to study Wikipedia? • How are wiki projects other than Wikipedia evolving? What are the benefits to studying other wiki projects and can comparisons and generalisations be made from our observations of these systems? • How does information contained in Wikipedia shape our understanding of broader social, economic, and political practices and processes? What theoretical frameworks in social, economic, legal and other relevant theoretical traditions can be applied to enrich the academic discourse on Wikipedia?'
Best, Heather.
On Nov 26, 2012, at 8:58 PM, Dirk Riehle wrote:
Wikis are big in education, so I'm sure educational topics are welcome. There are plenty of educators.
The open collaboration track (wikis in general, not Wikipedia) may be more suitable. Alternatively, for non-reserach work, the community track.
Cheers, Dirk
On 26.11.2012 05:05, Juliana Bastos Marques wrote:
Is there any interest on adding a topic related to Education? Sorry for insisting on this, but I'd really like to know whether I should focus my efforts on this group or start from the ground - in terms of congresses and journals - in another one.
Juliana.
On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Fuster, Mayo <Mayo.Fuster@eui.eu mailto:Mayo.Fuster@eui.eu> wrote:
Great! Thank you Heather.
You did not make reference in your reply to it so it is difficult to know if you consider it, but I still think adding gender question into the call for papers would be a good idea.
Thank you again. Cheers! Mayo
«·´`·.(*·.¸(`·.¸ ¸.·´)¸.·*).·´`·»«·´¨*·¸¸« Mayo Fuster Morell ».¸.·*¨`·» @Lilaroja «·´`·.(¸.·´(¸.·* *·.¸)`·.¸).·´`·»
Fellow. Berkman Center for Internet and Society. Harvard University. Researcher. Institute of Government and Public Policies. Autonomous University of Barcelona. Ph.D European University Institute
Website: http://www.onlinecreation.info ________________________________________ From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] on behalf of Heather Ford [hfordsa@gmail.com mailto:hfordsa@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 11:32 PM To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities Cc: Mark Graham Subject: Re: [Wiki-research-l] advice on Wikipedia topics for WikiSym 2013
Thank you, Mayo :)
I think one of the problems with WikiSym - especially the research tracks
- is that it is (mostly) an academic conference and so is almost entirely
dependent on the academic pool (+ funding challenges etc) for participants. That said, we're co-located with Wikimania this year which means that hopefully we can draw from a larger group of practitioners and researchers.
I'll definitely reach out to the WikiWomen's Collective and hopefully with enough time to plan ahead, we'll be able to engage more women in next year's event!
Thanks again for your suggestions.
Best, Heather.
On Nov 23, 2012, at 7:57 PM, Fuster, Mayo wrote:
Hello!
Thank you Heather for the note!. The call looks interesting to me, but I would suggest to add gender inclusion as a topic at the call for paper, as it is a central problem in Wikipedia.
Additionally, I would encourage the organizers of Wikisym 2013 to make an extra effort in order to assure engaging women in the conference. In 2012, the organizers of Wikisym were highly predominantly male: 89% of the Symposium Committee, 78% of the Program Committee, and 80% of the program of speakers were men (according to the data provided at http://www.wikisym.org/ws2012/bin/view/Main/Schedule). While other technological related conference (such as OK Fest and Personal Democracy Forum) are able to engage a better gender balance (data provided here: http://wiki.digital-commons.net/Gender).
In case it could he of help, this wiki collect best practices to engage women in technology related conferences and list of women experts: http://wiki.digital-commons.net/Gender
The WikiWomen's Collaborative wiki might also be a useful resource: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:WikiWomen%27s_Collaborative
Thank you again. Have a nice day! Mayo
«·´`·.(*·.¸(`·.¸ ¸.·´)¸.·*).·´`·»«·´¨*·¸¸« Mayo Fuster Morell ».¸.·*¨`·» @Lilaroja «·´`·.(¸.·´(¸.·* *·.¸)`·.¸).·´`·»
Fellow. Berkman Center for Internet and Society. Harvard University. Researcher. Institute of Government and Public Policies. Autonomous University of Barcelona. Ph.D European University Institute
Website: http://www.onlinecreation.info ________________________________________ From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org> [wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] on behalf of Heather Ford [hfordsa@gmail.com mailto:hfordsa@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 8:34 PM To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities Cc: Mark Graham Subject: [Wiki-research-l] advice on Wikipedia topics for WikiSym 2013
Mark Graham and I are co-chairs of the Wikipedia Track at next year's WikiSym conference (now with added OpenSym!) and we're preparing the call for papers to go out Friday week. There has been such great discussion on this list in the past about what is currently missing from Wikipedia research that I thought I'd send our draft to you in case there are items that you think we might add? Our current suggestions below:
• What do particular articles or groups or articles tell us aboutthe norms, governance and architecture of Wikipedia and its impact on media, politics and the social sphere? How is information on Wikipedia being shaped by the materiality of Wikipedia infrastructure?
• What is the impact of all/some of Wikipedia’s 211 languageeditions having on achieving the project’s goal to represent the “sum of all human knowledge”? Do smaller language editions follow the same development path as larger language editions? Can different representations in different languages tell us anything about cultural, national or regional differences?
• What are the methodological challenges to studying Wikipedia?How are researchers engaging with innovative methodologies to solve some of these problems? How are other researchers using traditional or well-established methods to study Wikipedia?
• How are wiki projects other than Wikipedia evolving? What arethe benefits to studying other wiki projects and can comparisons and generalisations be made from our observations of these systems?
• How does information contained in Wikipedia shape ourunderstanding of broader social, economic, and political practices and processes? What theoretical frameworks in social, economic, legal and other relevant theoretical traditions can be applied to enrich the academic discourse on Wikipedia?
Also really looking forward to some great papers next year. We think that it's a really good thing that Wikipedia research has a separate track next year and we're hoping that it's going to really strengthen the quality of research. Looking forward to any suggestions you might have.
Best, Heather.
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.net http://www.ethnographymatters.nethttp://www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.net http://www.ethnographymatters.nethttp://www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
-- www.domusaurea.org http://www.domusaurea.org
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
-- Website: http://dirkriehle.com - Twitter: @dirkriehle Ph (DE): +49-157-8153-4150 - Ph (US): +1-650-450-8550
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
Hello everyone,
I think one of the problems with WikiSym - especially the research tracks - is that it is (mostly) an academic conference and so is almost entirely dependent on the academic pool (+ funding challenges etc) for participants. That said,
not sure what the actual problem is that you are pointing to. The research tracks are set up the way they are set up to provide researchers with a quality-controlled publication mechanism that evaluates (and values) their work. Academic currency, that is :-)
Conference cost is a wholly separate issue. WikiSym + OpenSym is very cheap compared to most other academic conferences, and we are constantly pushing for lowering the prices.
we're co-located with Wikimania this year which means that hopefully we can draw from a larger group of practitioners and researchers.
The community track as well as open space will provide lots of outlets for anything that does not have to or does not want to pass academic peer review. There's ample space!
I'll definitely reach out to the WikiWomen's Collective and hopefully with enough time to plan ahead, we'll be able to engage more women in next year's event!
Sounds good to me.
Dirk
On Nov 23, 2012, at 7:57 PM, Fuster, Mayo wrote:
Hello!
Thank you Heather for the note!. The call looks interesting to me, but I would suggest to add gender inclusion as a topic at the call for paper, as it is a central problem in Wikipedia.
Additionally, I would encourage the organizers of Wikisym 2013 to make an extra effort in order to assure engaging women in the conference. In 2012, the organizers of Wikisym were highly predominantly male: 89% of the Symposium Committee, 78% of the Program Committee, and 80% of the program of speakers were men (according to the data provided at http://www.wikisym.org/ws2012/bin/view/Main/Schedule). While other technological related conference (such as OK Fest and Personal Democracy Forum) are able to engage a better gender balance (data provided here: http://wiki.digital-commons.net/Gender).
In case it could he of help, this wiki collect best practices to engage women in technology related conferences and list of women experts: http://wiki.digital-commons.net/Gender
The WikiWomen's Collaborative wiki might also be a useful resource: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:WikiWomen%27s_Collaborative
Thank you again. Have a nice day! Mayo
«·´`·.(*·.¸(`·.¸ ¸.·´)¸.·*).·´`·»«·´¨*·¸¸« Mayo Fuster Morell ».¸.·*¨`·» @Lilaroja «·´`·.(¸.·´(¸.·* *·.¸)`·.¸).·´`·»
Fellow. Berkman Center for Internet and Society. Harvard University. Researcher. Institute of Government and Public Policies. Autonomous University of Barcelona. Ph.D European University Institute
Website: http://www.onlinecreation.info ________________________________________ From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] on behalf of Heather Ford [hfordsa@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 8:34 PM To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities Cc: Mark Graham Subject: [Wiki-research-l] advice on Wikipedia topics for WikiSym 2013
Mark Graham and I are co-chairs of the Wikipedia Track at next year's WikiSym conference (now with added OpenSym!) and we're preparing the call for papers to go out Friday week. There has been such great discussion on this list in the past about what is currently missing from Wikipedia research that I thought I'd send our draft to you in case there are items that you think we might add? Our current suggestions below:
• What do particular articles or groups or articles tell us about thenorms, governance and architecture of Wikipedia and its impact on media, politics and the social sphere? How is information on Wikipedia being shaped by the materiality of Wikipedia infrastructure?
• What is the impact of all/some of Wikipedia’s 211 language editionshaving on achieving the project’s goal to represent the “sum of all human knowledge”? Do smaller language editions follow the same development path as larger language editions? Can different representations in different languages tell us anything about cultural, national or regional differences?
• What are the methodological challenges to studying Wikipedia? Howare researchers engaging with innovative methodologies to solve some of these problems? How are other researchers using traditional or well-established methods to study Wikipedia?
• How are wiki projects other than Wikipedia evolving? What are thebenefits to studying other wiki projects and can comparisons and generalisations be made from our observations of these systems?
• How does information contained in Wikipedia shape our understandingof broader social, economic, and political practices and processes? What theoretical frameworks in social, economic, legal and other relevant theoretical traditions can be applied to enrich the academic discourse on Wikipedia?
Also really looking forward to some great papers next year. We think that it's a really good thing that Wikipedia research has a separate track next year and we're hoping that it's going to really strengthen the quality of research. Looking forward to any suggestions you might have.
Best, Heather.
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.net http://www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.net http://www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Apologies for my very tardy response!
More below:
On Nov 26, 2012, at 8:56 PM, Dirk Riehle wrote:
Hello everyone,
I think one of the problems with WikiSym - especially the research tracks - is that it is (mostly) an academic conference and so is almost entirely dependent on the academic pool (+ funding challenges etc) for participants. That said,
not sure what the actual problem is that you are pointing to. The research tracks are set up the way they are set up to provide researchers with a quality-controlled publication mechanism that evaluates (and values) their work. Academic currency, that is :-)
I was referring to the comparison with OK Fest and Personal Democracy Forum which don't seem to be academic conferences. And I meant that when you have broader events like the latter, you're able to get funding for specific groups to be represented, whereas with an academic conference, you're limited by the academic pool and less participation funding. Unless I'm wrong, Dirk? Do you guys have funding to focus on involving more women, for example?
Conference cost is a wholly separate issue. WikiSym + OpenSym is very cheap compared to most other academic conferences, and we are constantly pushing for lowering the prices.
I guess it doesn't matter how cheap the conference itself is. Travel funding will always be the limiting factor.
we're co-located with Wikimania this year which means that hopefully we can draw from a larger group of practitioners and researchers.
The community track as well as open space will provide lots of outlets for anything that does not have to or does not want to pass academic peer review. There's ample space!
Exactly!
Best, Heather.
I'll definitely reach out to the WikiWomen's Collective and hopefully with enough time to plan ahead, we'll be able to engage more women in next year's event!
Sounds good to me.
Dirk
On Nov 23, 2012, at 7:57 PM, Fuster, Mayo wrote:
Hello!
Thank you Heather for the note!. The call looks interesting to me, but I would suggest to add gender inclusion as a topic at the call for paper, as it is a central problem in Wikipedia.
Additionally, I would encourage the organizers of Wikisym 2013 to make an extra effort in order to assure engaging women in the conference. In 2012, the organizers of Wikisym were highly predominantly male: 89% of the Symposium Committee, 78% of the Program Committee, and 80% of the program of speakers were men (according to the data provided at http://www.wikisym.org/ws2012/bin/view/Main/Schedule). While other technological related conference (such as OK Fest and Personal Democracy Forum) are able to engage a better gender balance (data provided here: http://wiki.digital-commons.net/Gender).
In case it could he of help, this wiki collect best practices to engage women in technology related conferences and list of women experts: http://wiki.digital-commons.net/Gender
The WikiWomen's Collaborative wiki might also be a useful resource: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:WikiWomen%27s_Collaborative
Thank you again. Have a nice day! Mayo
«·´`·.(*·.¸(`·.¸ ¸.·´)¸.·*).·´`·»«·´¨*·¸¸« Mayo Fuster Morell ».¸.·*¨`·» @Lilaroja «·´`·.(¸.·´(¸.·* *·.¸)`·.¸).·´`·»
Fellow. Berkman Center for Internet and Society. Harvard University. Researcher. Institute of Government and Public Policies. Autonomous University of Barcelona. Ph.D European University Institute
Website: http://www.onlinecreation.info ________________________________________ From: wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [wiki-research-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] on behalf of Heather Ford [hfordsa@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 8:34 PM To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities Cc: Mark Graham Subject: [Wiki-research-l] advice on Wikipedia topics for WikiSym 2013
Mark Graham and I are co-chairs of the Wikipedia Track at next year's WikiSym conference (now with added OpenSym!) and we're preparing the call for papers to go out Friday week. There has been such great discussion on this list in the past about what is currently missing from Wikipedia research that I thought I'd send our draft to you in case there are items that you think we might add? Our current suggestions below:
• What do particular articles or groups or articles tell us about thenorms, governance and architecture of Wikipedia and its impact on media, politics and the social sphere? How is information on Wikipedia being shaped by the materiality of Wikipedia infrastructure?
• What is the impact of all/some of Wikipedia’s 211 language editionshaving on achieving the project’s goal to represent the “sum of all human knowledge”? Do smaller language editions follow the same development path as larger language editions? Can different representations in different languages tell us anything about cultural, national or regional differences?
• What are the methodological challenges to studying Wikipedia? Howare researchers engaging with innovative methodologies to solve some of these problems? How are other researchers using traditional or well-established methods to study Wikipedia?
• How are wiki projects other than Wikipedia evolving? What are thebenefits to studying other wiki projects and can comparisons and generalisations be made from our observations of these systems?
• How does information contained in Wikipedia shape our understandingof broader social, economic, and political practices and processes? What theoretical frameworks in social, economic, legal and other relevant theoretical traditions can be applied to enrich the academic discourse on Wikipedia?
Also really looking forward to some great papers next year. We think that it's a really good thing that Wikipedia research has a separate track next year and we're hoping that it's going to really strengthen the quality of research. Looking forward to any suggestions you might have.
Best, Heather.
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.net http://www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.net http://www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
-- Website: http://dirkriehle.com - Twitter: @dirkriehle Ph (DE): +49-157-8153-4150 - Ph (US): +1-650-450-8550
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
Hi Heather, everyone:
which don't seem to be academic conferences. And I meant that when you have broader events like the latter, you're able to get funding for specific groups to be represented, whereas with an academic conference, you're limited by the academic pool and less participation funding. Unless I'm wrong, Dirk? Do you guys have funding to focus on involving more women, for example?
Would love to see that! Alas, it always hinges on someone doing the work. We have not been very good in the past in raising funds for specific groups.
The Wikimedia Foundation has been good to us, sponsoring WikiSym in the past. For 2013, we hope for continued sponsorship. Should we specifically request money for particular subgroups?
In general, if someone reads this and really would like to help raise funds for a particular subgroup and be involved in WikiSym + OpenSym, please put out your little finger and we'll grab your hand!
Cheers, Dirk
Did we mention that WikiSym will be co-located with Wikimania in 2013? So if we find special funding for subgroups, folks will be able to attend both events more easily!
On 05.12.2012 23:06, Dirk Riehle wrote:
Hi Heather, everyone:
which don't seem to be academic conferences. And I meant that when you have broader events like the latter, you're able to get funding for specific groups to be represented, whereas with an academic conference, you're limited by the academic pool and less participation funding. Unless I'm wrong, Dirk? Do you guys have funding to focus on involving more women, for example?
Would love to see that! Alas, it always hinges on someone doing the work. We have not been very good in the past in raising funds for specific groups.
The Wikimedia Foundation has been good to us, sponsoring WikiSym in the past. For 2013, we hope for continued sponsorship. Should we specifically request money for particular subgroups?
In general, if someone reads this and really would like to help raise funds for a particular subgroup and be involved in WikiSym + OpenSym, please put out your little finger and we'll grab your hand!
Cheers, Dirk
As a researcher I really like the first three items.
I am not sure about the third one. Is it designed to connect this track with the Wikipedia Track, and/or in relation to other tracks?
The fifth item seems a bit general. It might be helpful to have a look at what the Wikimania is doing: http://wikimania2013.wikimedia.org/wiki/Submissions
I would guess that since Wikipedia projects are increasingly organized and expanded, various cultural and educational activities have been happening (or about to happen) in a more organized way by various actors, such as local chapters, partners of Cultural and Education Outreach programs and GLAM – galleries, libraries, archives and museums – institutions. It might be a good idea to frame this sort of civic- or digital- literacy efforts, under/over a loftier UN-like Human Development agenda (and more interestingly I believe, data!)
Finally, just a gap I sense is worth covering. I see there are efforts to use Wikipedia simply as big data for research in different domains, treating it as big language corpus, sentiment databases, business intelligence, visualization, etc. Sometimes such discipline-specific research does not overlap much and/or does not show up in wikisym or wikimania. Still, because of the fact they all approach Wikipedia for data, it may be a good idea to grow a platform where researchers can share various ways and experiences dealing with the big data Wikipedia. I personally believe that a research ecology around the Wikipedia the big data may be emerging, if the relevant data, tools and crafts begin to grow around Wikipedia. I agree with Heather that we may have too much big data analysis on the English version of Wikipedia (wink wink), but it may be relevant to use this opportunity to document, or even conduct ethnography work on various human efforts trying to use various tools of "big data" to (mis-)read/use/exploit Wikipedia differently.
Best, han-teng liao
On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 3:34 AM, Heather Ford hfordsa@gmail.com wrote:
Mark Graham and I are co-chairs of the Wikipedia Track at next year's WikiSym conference (now with added OpenSym!) and we're preparing the call for papers to go out Friday week. There has been such great discussion on this list in the past about what is currently missing from Wikipedia research that I thought I'd send our draft to you in case there are items that you think we might add? Our current suggestions below:
• What do particular articles or groups or articles tell us about the norms, governance and architecture of Wikipedia and its impact on media, politics and the social sphere? How is information on Wikipedia being shaped by the materiality of Wikipedia infrastructure? • What is the impact of all/some of Wikipedia’s 211 language editions having on achieving the project’s goal to represent the “sum of all human knowledge”? Do smaller language editions follow the same development path as larger language editions? Can different representations in different languages tell us anything about cultural, national or regional differences? • What are the methodological challenges to studying Wikipedia? How are researchers engaging with innovative methodologies to solve some of these problems? How are other researchers using traditional or well-established methods to study Wikipedia? • How are wiki projects other than Wikipedia evolving? What are the benefits to studying other wiki projects and can comparisons and generalisations be made from our observations of these systems? • How does information contained in Wikipedia shape our understanding of broader social, economic, and political practices and processes? What theoretical frameworks in social, economic, legal and other relevant theoretical traditions can be applied to enrich the academic discourse on Wikipedia?Also really looking forward to some great papers next year. We think that it's a really good thing that Wikipedia research has a separate track next year and we're hoping that it's going to really strengthen the quality of research. Looking forward to any suggestions you might have.
Best, Heather.
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Thank you so much for your thoughts and comment, Han-Teng! I hope this means that you'll be participating next year :)
On Nov 24, 2012, at 3:57 PM, Han-Teng Liao wrote:
As a researcher I really like the first three items.
I am not sure about the third one. Is it designed to connect this track with the Wikipedia Track, and/or in relation to other tracks?
This one? "What are the methodological challenges to studying Wikipedia? How are researchers engaging with innovative methodologies to solve some of these problems? How are other researchers using traditional or well-established methods to study Wikipedia?"
This *is* the Wikipedia Track :) So not sure what you mean when you say 'connect this track with the Wikipedia Track' (it is confusing, I know!)
Mark and I thought it would be really useful to have people write and talk about their methods when studying Wikipedia - especially since it is such an interdisciplinary field.
The fifth item seems a bit general.
Yes, I think Mark can pitch in here but we thought that it would be good to link Wikipedia research back to social theory because that is sometimes lacking in the research. But perhaps we should tighten it up a bit?
It might be helpful to have a look at what the Wikimania is doing: http://wikimania2013.wikimedia.org/wiki/Submissions
Yes, thank you! Interesting that they have an 'academic track' this year...
I would guess that since Wikipedia projects are increasingly organized and expanded, various cultural and educational activities have been happening (or about to happen) in a more organized way by various actors, such as local chapters, partners of Cultural and Education Outreach programs and GLAM – galleries, libraries, archives and museums – institutions. It might be a good idea to frame this sort of civic- or digital- literacy efforts, under/over a loftier UN-like Human Development agenda (and more interestingly I believe, data!)
Sounds interesting but not sure I understand the suggestion? If you're suggesting we frame another research area/question around how institutions are interacting with Wikipedia, then I think that's a great idea!
Finally, just a gap I sense is worth covering. I see there are efforts to use Wikipedia simply as big data for research in different domains, treating it as big language corpus, sentiment databases, business intelligence, visualization, etc. Sometimes such discipline-specific research does not overlap much and/or does not show up in wikisym or wikimania. Still, because of the fact they all approach Wikipedia for data, it may be a good idea to grow a platform where researchers can share various ways and experiences dealing with the big data Wikipedia.
Yes, good idea! I'm thinking that we should fit this into the methods area....
I personally believe that a research ecology around the Wikipedia the big data may be emerging, if the relevant data, tools and crafts begin to grow around Wikipedia. I agree with Heather that we may have too much big data analysis on the English version of Wikipedia (wink wink), but it may be relevant to use this opportunity to document, or even conduct ethnography work on various human efforts trying to use various tools of "big data" to (mis-)read/use/exploit Wikipedia differently.
I totally agree (as you might have guessed ;)
Best, Heather.
Best, han-teng liao
On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 3:34 AM, Heather Ford hfordsa@gmail.com wrote:
Mark Graham and I are co-chairs of the Wikipedia Track at next year's WikiSym conference (now with added OpenSym!) and we're preparing the call for papers to go out Friday week. There has been such great discussion on this list in the past about what is currently missing from Wikipedia research that I thought I'd send our draft to you in case there are items that you think we might add? Our current suggestions below:
• What do particular articles or groups or articles tell us about the norms, governance and architecture of Wikipedia and its impact on media, politics and the social sphere? How is information on Wikipedia being shaped by the materiality of Wikipedia infrastructure? • What is the impact of all/some of Wikipedia’s 211 language editions having on achieving the project’s goal to represent the “sum of all human knowledge”? Do smaller language editions follow the same development path as larger language editions? Can different representations in different languages tell us anything about cultural, national or regional differences? • What are the methodological challenges to studying Wikipedia? How are researchers engaging with innovative methodologies to solve some of these problems? How are other researchers using traditional or well-established methods to study Wikipedia? • How are wiki projects other than Wikipedia evolving? What are the benefits to studying other wiki projects and can comparisons and generalisations be made from our observations of these systems? • How does information contained in Wikipedia shape our understanding of broader social, economic, and political practices and processes? What theoretical frameworks in social, economic, legal and other relevant theoretical traditions can be applied to enrich the academic discourse on Wikipedia?Also really looking forward to some great papers next year. We think that it's a really good thing that Wikipedia research has a separate track next year and we're hoping that it's going to really strengthen the quality of research. Looking forward to any suggestions you might have.
Best, Heather.
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org
wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org