Dissertation: In Good Faith - Wiki-research-l

2 Apr 2008

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.
]]