Hello everyone, I thought some folks might be interested in:
[[http://reagle.org/joseph/blog/culture/wikipedia/annc-in-good-faith ... Wikipedia, "the free encyclopedia anyone can edit," has caught the attention of the world. Discourse about the efficacy and legitimacy of this collaborative work abound, from the news pages of "The New York Times" to the satire of "The Onion." So how might we understand Wikipedia collaboration? In part 1 I argue that Wikipedia is an heir to a twentieth century vision of universal access and goodwill; an idea advocated by H. G. Wells and Paul Otlet almost a century ago. This vision is inspired by technological innovation -- microfilm and index cards then, digital networks today -- and driven by the encyclopedic compulsion to capture and index everything known. In addition, I place Wikipedia within the history of reference works, focusing on their (often fervent) creators, and the cooperation, competition, and plagiarism encountered in their production. In part 2, I conceptualize Wikipedia as a technologically mediated "open" community; through ethnography I identify the norms, practices and meanings of Wikipedia culture including "Neutral Point of View," good faith, and authorial leadership. In particular, I use the metaphor of a jigsaw puzzle to explain the operation of Wikipedia's collaborative culture: "Neutral Point of View" ensures that the scattered pieces of what we think we know can be joined and good faith facilitates the actual practice of fitting them together. Finally, in part 3 I focus on the cultural reception and interpretation of Wikipedia. I argue that in the history of reference works Wikipedia is not alone in serving as a flashpoint for larger social anxieties about technological and social change. I try to make sense of the social unease embodied in and prompted by Wikipedia by way of four themes present throughout the dissertation: collaborative practice, universal vision, encyclopedic impulse, and technological inspiration. I show that the discourse around Wikipedia reveals concerns about how new forms of technologically mediated content production are changing the role and autonomy of the individual, the authority of existing institutions, and the character (and quality) of cultural products. ]]
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 1:16 PM, Joseph Reagle reagle@mit.edu wrote:
Hello everyone, I thought some folks might be interested in:
[[http://reagle.org/joseph/blog/culture/wikipedia/annc-in-good-faith
Hearty congratulations, Joseph! It looks good from a quick skim - I hope to give more substantive feedback over time. Also, how does one authenticate oneself in order to download the pdf version?
Cormac
Congratulations! Very interesting to read over the first chapter. If possible, it would be helpful to look over the pdf.
-Aude
On 4/2/08, Cormac Lawler cormaggio@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 1:16 PM, Joseph Reagle reagle@mit.edu wrote:
Hello everyone, I thought some folks might be interested in:
[[http://reagle.org/joseph/blog/culture/wikipedia/annc-in-good-faith
Hearty congratulations, Joseph! It looks good from a quick skim - I hope to give more substantive feedback over time. Also, how does one authenticate oneself in order to download the pdf version?
Cormac
Aude wrote:
Congratulations! Very interesting to read over the first chapter. If possible, it would be helpful to look over the pdf.
Indeed. May I suggest adding the direct link to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ACST#Thesis ?
Congrats. I hope I can finish mine on Chinese Wikipedia within two years. May I ask is your ethnographic research mainly about English version of Wikipedia?
Joseph Reagle wrote:
Hello everyone, I thought some folks might be interested in:
[[http://reagle.org/joseph/blog/culture/wikipedia/annc-in-good-faith ...
Many congratulations! We will have to throw you a party at some point. (Wikimania?)
-- phoebe
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 5:16 AM, Joseph Reagle reagle@mit.edu wrote:
Hello everyone, I thought some folks might be interested in:
[[http://reagle.org/joseph/blog/culture/wikipedia/annc-in-good-faith ... Wikipedia, "the free encyclopedia anyone can edit," has caught the attention of the world. Discourse about the efficacy and legitimacy of this collaborative work abound, from the news pages of "The New York Times" to the satire of "The Onion." So how might we understand Wikipedia collaboration? In part 1 I argue that Wikipedia is an heir to a twentieth century vision of universal access and goodwill; an idea advocated by H. G. Wells and Paul Otlet almost a century ago. This vision is inspired by technological innovation -- microfilm and index cards then, digital networks today -- and driven by the encyclopedic compulsion to capture and index everything known. In addition, I place Wikipedia within the history of reference works, focusing on their (often fervent) creators, and the cooperation, competition, and plagiarism encountered in their production. In part 2, I conceptualize Wikipedia as a technologically mediated "open" community; through ethnography I identify the norms, practices and meanings of Wikipedia culture including "Neutral Point of View," good faith, and authorial leadership. In particular, I use the metaphor of a jigsaw puzzle to explain the operation of Wikipedia's collaborative culture: "Neutral Point of View" ensures that the scattered pieces of what we think we know can be joined and good faith facilitates the actual practice of fitting them together. Finally, in part 3 I focus on the cultural reception and interpretation of Wikipedia. I argue that in the history of reference works Wikipedia is not alone in serving as a flashpoint for larger social anxieties about technological and social change. I try to make sense of the social unease embodied in and prompted by Wikipedia by way of four themes present throughout the dissertation: collaborative practice, universal vision, encyclopedic impulse, and technological inspiration. I show that the discourse around Wikipedia reveals concerns about how new forms of technologically mediated content production are changing the role and autonomy of the individual, the authority of existing institutions, and the character (and quality) of cultural products. ]]
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Congratulations, Joseph. Very good work, you finally succeded in providing a major contribution to this interesting research area.
Regards,
Felipe.
Joseph Reagle reagle@mit.edu escribió: Hello everyone, I thought some folks might be interested in:
[[http://reagle.org/joseph/blog/culture/wikipedia/annc-in-good-faith .... Wikipedia, "the free encyclopedia anyone can edit," has caught the attention of the world. Discourse about the efficacy and legitimacy of this collaborative work abound, from the news pages of "The New York Times" to the satire of "The Onion." So how might we understand Wikipedia collaboration? In part 1 I argue that Wikipedia is an heir to a twentieth century vision of universal access and goodwill; an idea advocated by H. G. Wells and Paul Otlet almost a century ago. This vision is inspired by technological innovation -- microfilm and index cards then, digital networks today -- and driven by the encyclopedic compulsion to capture and index everything known. In addition, I place Wikipedia within the history of reference works, focusing on their (often fervent) creators, and the cooperation, competition, and plagiarism encountered in their production. In part 2, I conceptualize Wikipedia as a technologically mediated "open" community; through ethnography I identify the norms, practices and meanings of Wikipedia culture including "Neutral Point of View," good faith, and authorial leadership. In particular, I use the metaphor of a jigsaw puzzle to explain the operation of Wikipedia's collaborative culture: "Neutral Point of View" ensures that the scattered pieces of what we think we know can be joined and good faith facilitates the actual practice of fitting them together. Finally, in part 3 I focus on the cultural reception and interpretation of Wikipedia. I argue that in the history of reference works Wikipedia is not alone in serving as a flashpoint for larger social anxieties about technological and social change. I try to make sense of the social unease embodied in and prompted by Wikipedia by way of four themes present throughout the dissertation: collaborative practice, universal vision, encyclopedic impulse, and technological inspiration. I show that the discourse around Wikipedia reveals concerns about how new forms of technologically mediated content production are changing the role and autonomy of the individual, the authority of existing institutions, and the character (and quality) of cultural products. ]]
_______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
---------------------------------
¿Con Mascota por primera vez? - Sé un mejor Amigo Entra en Yahoo! Respuestas.
wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org