DOCSLIB.ORG

Wikipedia from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia This Article Is About the Internet Encyclopedia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Wikipedia from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia This Article Is About the Internet Encyclopedia Wikipedia From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This article is about the Internet encyclopedia. For other uses, see Wikipedia ( disambiguation). For Wikipedia's visitor introduction, see Wikipedia:About. For the Wikipedia home page, see Wikipedia:Main Page. Wikipedia A white sphere made of large jigsaw pieces, with letters from several alphabets shown on the pieces Wikipedia wordmark The logo of Wikipedia, a globe featuring glyphs from several writing systems for the letter W or sounds "wi", "wo" or "wa" Screenshot [show] Web address wikipedia.org Slogan The free encyclopedia that anyone can edit Commercial? No Type of site Internet encyclopedia Registration Optional[notes 1] Available in 288 editions[1] Users 132,786 active editors[notes 2] and 27,643,029 registered editors Content license CC Attribution / Share-Alike 3.0 Most text is also dual-licensed under GFDL; media licensing varies Written in L A M P platform[2] Owner Wikimedia Foundation Created by Jimmy Wales, Larry Sanger[3] Launched January 15, 2001; 15 years ago Alexa rank Decrease 7[4] (January 2016) Current status Active Wikipedia (Listeni/?w?k?'pi?di?/ or Listeni/?w?ki'pi?di?/ wik-i-pee-dee-?) is a free-access, free-content Internet encyclopedia, supported and hosted by the non -profit Wikimedia Foundation. Those who can access the site can edit most of its articles.[5] Wikipedia is ranked among the ten most popular websites,[4] and co nstitutes the Internet's largest and most popular general reference work.[6][7][ 8] Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger launched Wikipedia on January 15, 2001. Sanger[9] c oined its name,[10] a portmanteau of wiki[notes 3] and encyclopedia. Initially o nly in English, Wikipedia quickly became multilingual as it developed similar ve rsions in other languages, which differ in content and in editing practices. The English Wikipedia is now one of 291 Wikipedia editions and is the largest with 5,093,857 articles (having reached 5,000,000 articles in November 2015). There i s a grand total, including all Wikipedias, of over 38 million articles in over 2 50 different languages.[12] As of February 2014, it had 18 billion page views an d nearly 500 million unique visitors each month.[13] A peer review of 42 science articles found in both Encyclopædia Britannica and Wik ipedia was published in Nature in 2005, and found that Wikipedia's level of accu racy approached Encyclopedia Britannica's.[14] Criticisms of Wikipedia include c laims that it exhibits systemic bias, presents a mixture of "truths, half truths , and some falsehoods",[15] and that in controversial topics it is subject to ma nipulation and spin.[16] Contents [hide] 1 History 2 Openness 2.1 Restrictions 2.2 Review of changes 2.3 Vandalism 3 Policies and laws 3.1 Content policies and guidelines 4 Governance 4.1 Administrators 4.2 Dispute resolution 5 Community 5.1 Diversity 6 Language editions 7 Critical reception 7.1 Accuracy of content 7.2 Quality of writing 7.3 Coverage of topics and systemic bias 7.4 Explicit content 7.5 Privacy 7.6 Sexism 8 Operation 8.1 Wikimedia Foundation and the Wikimedia chapters 8.2 Software operations and support 8.3 Automated editing 8.4 Wikiprojects, and assessments of articles' importance and quality 8.5 Hardware operations and support 8.6 Internal research and operational development 8.7 Internal news publications 9 Access to content 9.1 Content licensing 9.2 Methods of access 10 Impact 10.1 Readership 10.2 Cultural significance 10.3 Sister projects Wikimedia 10.4 Publishing 10.5 Scientific use 11 Related projects 12 See also 13 References 13.1 Notes 14 Further reading 14.1 Academic studies 14.2 Books 14.3 Book reviews and other articles 15 External links History Main article: History of Wikipedia Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger Logo reading "Nupedia.com the free encyclopedia" in blue with large initial "N". Wikipedia originally developed from another encyclopedia project, Nupedia Other collaborative online encyclopedias were attempted before Wikipedia but non e were so successful.[17] Wikipedia began as a complementary project for Nupedia, a free online English-la nguage encyclopedia project whose articles were written by experts and reviewed under a formal process. Nupedia was founded on March 9, 2000, under the ownershi p of Bomis, a web portal company. Its main figures were the Bomis CEO Jimmy Wale s and Larry Sanger, editor-in-chief for Nupedia and later Wikipedia. Nupedia was licensed initially under its own Nupedia Open Content License, switching to the GNU Free Documentation License before Wikipedia's founding at the urging of Ric hard Stallman.[18] Sanger and Wales founded Wikipedia.[19][20] While Wales is cr edited with defining the goal of making a publicly editable encyclopedia,[21][22 ] Sanger is credited with the strategy of using a wiki to reach that goal.[23] O n January 10, 2001, Sanger proposed on the Nupedia mailing list to create a wiki as a "feeder" project for Nupedia.[24] File:How Wikipedia contributes to free knowledge.webm Wikipedia according to Simpleshow External audio The Great Book of Knowledge, Part 1, Ideas with Paul Kennedy, CBC, January 15, 2014 Wikipedia was formally launched on January 15, 2001, as a single English-languag e edition at www.wikipedia.com,[25] and announced by Sanger on the Nupedia maili ng list.[21] Wikipedia's policy of "neutral point-of-view"[26] was codified in i ts first months. Otherwise, there were relatively few rules initially and Wikipe dia operated independently of Nupedia.[21] Originally, Bomis intended to make Wi kipedia a business for profit.[27] Wikipedia gained early contributors from Nupedia, Slashdot postings, and web sea rch engine indexing. By August 8, 2001, Wikipedia had over 8,000 articles.[28] O n September 25, 2001, Wikipedia had over 13,000 articles.[29] And by the end of 2001 it had grown to approximately 20,000 articles and 18 language editions. It had reached 26 language editions by late 2002, 46 by the end of 2003, and 161 by the final days of 2004.[30] Nupedia and Wikipedia coexisted until the former's servers were taken down permanently in 2003, and its text was incorporated into Wikipedia. English Wikipedia passed the mark of two million articles on Septembe r 9, 2007, making it the largest encyclopedia ever assembled, surpassing even th e 1408 Yongle Encyclopedia, which had held the record for almost 600 years.[31] Citing fears of commercial advertising and lack of control in Wikipedia, users o f the Spanish Wikipedia forked from Wikipedia to create the Enciclopedia Libre i n February 2002.[32] These moves encouraged Wales to announce that Wikipedia wou ld not display advertisements, and to change Wikipedia's domain from wikipedia.c om to wikipedia.org.[33] Though the English Wikipedia reached three million articles in August 2009, the growth of the edition, in terms of the numbers of articles and of contributors, appears to have peaked around early 2007.[34] Around 1,800 articles were added d aily to the encyclopedia in 2006; by 2013 that average was roughly 800.[35] A te am at the Palo Alto Research Center attributed this slowing of growth to the pro ject's increasing exclusivity and resistance to change.[36] Others suggest that the growth is flattening naturally because articles that could be called "low-ha nging fruit"topics that clearly merit an articlehave already been created and buil t up extensively.[37][38][39] In November 2009, a researcher at the Rey Juan Carlos University in Madrid (Spai n) found that the English Wikipedia had lost 49,000 editors during the first thr ee months of 2009; in comparison, the project lost only 4,900 editors during the same period in 2008.[40][41] The Wall Street Journal cited the array of rules a pplied to editing and disputes related to such content among the reasons for thi s trend.[42] Wales disputed these claims in 2009, denying the decline and questi oning the methodology of the study.[43] Two years later, Wales acknowledged the presence of a slight decline, noting a decrease from "a little more than 36,000 writers" in June 2010 to 35,800 in June 2011.[44] In the same interview, Wales a lso claimed the number of editors was "stable and sustainable", a claim which wa s questioned by MIT's Technology Review in a 2013 article titled "The Decline of Wikipedia."[45] In July 2012, the Atlantic reported that the number of administ rators is also in decline.[46] In the November 25, 2013, issue of New York magaz ine, Katherine Ward stated "Wikipedia, the sixth-most-used website, is facing an internal crisis. In 2013, MIT's Technology Review revealed that since 2007, the site has lost a third of the volunteer editors who update and correct the onlin e encyclopedia's millions of pages and those still there have focused increasing ly on minutiae."[47] Wikipedia blackout protest against SOPA on January 18, 2012 File:Wikipedia Edit 2014.webm A promotional video of the Wikimedia Foundation that encourages viewers to edit Wikipedia, mostly reviewing 2014 via Wikipedia content In January 2007, Wikipedia entered for the first time the top-ten list of the mo st popular websites in the United States, according to comScore Networks. With 4 2.9 million unique visitors, Wikipedia was ranked number 9, surpassing the New Y ork Times (#10) and Apple (#11). This marked a significant increase over January 2006, when the rank was number 33, with Wikipedia receiving around 18.3 million unique visitors.[48] As of March 2015, Wikipedia has rank 6[4][49] among websit es in terms of popularity according to Alexa Internet.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 15 July 2011 Page 1 of 17
    Radio 4 Listings for 9 – 15 July 2011 Page 1 of 17 SATURDAY 09 JULY 2011 events company Endurance Life in partnership with Natural Edwards had barely arrived in Montserrat in 1995 when the England to allow runners to take up the challenge of a long volcanic eruptions took place that were to cover most of the SAT 00:00 Midnight News (b0128qd7) distance route whenever they want to rather than as part of a island in ash. He went back 16 years later to see how life has The latest national and international news from BBC Radio 4. large event. The aim is to run as far as they would like to go, changed for both visitors and residents. Language teacher Followed by Weather. whenever they choose, and enter an electronic timing tag into Elisabeth Smith tells Sandi why the British are so bad at boxes fitted at points along the way which records their speaking foreign languages when travelling - and what they can progress. The scheme is currently operating on several of our do about it. SAT 00:30 Book of the Week (b0128l70) national trails and the organisers say that this has been created Constance: The Tragic and Scandalous Life of Mrs Oscar Wilde by a team of trail runners who feel that the joy of running is Producer: Harry Parker. increased greatly when it takes place in a stunning landscape. Episode 5 But walkers and outdoor enthusiasts are questioning the need for this scheme. Many people are concerned about the SAT 10:30 Found in Translation (b012f5qj) Written by Franny Moyle.
    [Show full text]
  • Decentralization in Wikipedia Governance
    Decentralization in Wikipedia Governance Andrea Forte1, Vanessa Larco2 and Amy Bruckman1 1GVU Center, College of Computing, Georgia Institute of Technology {aforte, asb}@cc.gatech.edu 2Microsoft [email protected] This is a preprint version of the journal article: Forte, Andrea, Vanessa Larco and Amy Bruckman. (2009) Decentralization in Wikipedia Governance. Journal of Management Information Systems. 26(1) pp 49-72. Publisher: M.E. Sharp www.mesharpe.com/journals.asp Abstract How does “self-governance” happen in Wikipedia? Through in-depth interviews with twenty individuals who have held a variety of responsibilities in the English-language Wikipedia, we obtained rich descriptions of how various forces produce and regulate social structures on the site. Our analysis describes Wikipedia as an organization with highly refined policies, norms, and a technological architecture that supports organizational ideals of consensus building and discussion. We describe how governance on the site is becoming increasingly decentralized as the community grows and how this is predicted by theories of commons-based governance developed in offline contexts. We also briefly examine local governance structures called WikiProjects through the example of WikiProject Military History, one of the oldest and most prolific projects on the site. 1. The Mechanisms of Self-Organization Should a picture of a big, hairy tarantula appear in an encyclopedia article about arachnophobia? Does it illustrate the point, or just frighten potential readers? Reasonable people might disagree on this question. In a freely editable site like Wikipedia, anyone can add the photo, and someone else can remove it. And someone can add it back, and the process continues.
    [Show full text]
  • Position Description Addenda
    POSITION DESCRIPTION January 2014 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director - Addenda The Wikimedia Foundation is a radically transparent organization, and much information can be found at www.wikimediafoundation.org . That said, certain information might be particularly useful to nominators and prospective candidates, including: Announcements pertaining to the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Kicking off the search for our next Executive Director by Former Wikimedia Foundation Board Chair Kat Walsh An announcement from Wikimedia Foundation ED Sue Gardner by Wikimedia Executive Director Sue Gardner Video Interviews on the Wikimedia Community and Foundation and Its History Some of the values and experiences of the Wikimedia Community are best described directly by those who have been intimately involved in the organization’s dramatic expansion. The following interviews are available for viewing though mOppenheim.TV . • 2013 Interview with Former Wikimedia Board Chair Kat Walsh • 2013 Interview with Wikimedia Executive Director Sue Gardner • 2009 Interview with Wikimedia Executive Director Sue Gardner Guiding Principles of the Wikimedia Foundation and the Wikimedia Community The following article by Sue Gardner, the current Executive Director of the Wikimedia Foundation, has received broad distribution and summarizes some of the core cultural values shared by Wikimedia’s staff, board and community. Topics covered include: • Freedom and open source • Serving every human being • Transparency • Accountability • Stewardship • Shared power • Internationalism • Free speech • Independence More information can be found at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Sue_Gardner/Wikimedia_Foundation_Guiding_Principles Wikimedia Policies The Wikimedia Foundation has an extensive list of policies and procedures available online at: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Policies Wikimedia Projects All major projects of the Wikimedia Foundation are collaboratively developed by users around the world using the MediaWiki software.
    [Show full text]
  • CHILLING EFFECTS: ONLINE SURVEILLANCE and WIKIPEDIA USE Jonathon W
    CHILLING EFFECTS: ONLINE SURVEILLANCE AND WIKIPEDIA USE Jonathon W. Penney† ABSTRACT This Article discusses the results of the first empirical study providing evidence of regulatory “chilling effects” of Wikipedia users associated with online government surveillance. The study explores how traffic to Wikipedia articles on topics that raise privacy concerns for Wikipedia users decreased after the widespread publicity about NSA/PRISM surveillance revelations in June 2013. Using an interdisciplinary research design, the study tests the hypothesis, based on chilling effects theory, that traffic to privacy-sensitive Wikipedia articles reduced after the mass surveillance revelations. The Article finds not only a statistically significant immediate decline in traffic for these Wikipedia articles after June 2013, but also a change in the overall secular trend in the view count traffic, suggesting not only immediate but also long-term chilling effects resulting from the NSA/PRISM online surveillance revelations. These, and other results from the case study, not only offer evidence for chilling effects associated with online surveillance, but also offer important insights about how we should understand such chilling effects and their scope, including how they interact with other dramatic or significant events (like war and conflict) and their broader implications for privacy, U.S. constitutional litigation, and the health of democratic society. This study is among the first to evidence—using either Wikipedia data or web traffic data more generally—how government surveillance and similar actions may impact online activities, including access to information and knowledge online. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15779/Z38SS13 © 2016 Jonathon W. Penney. † The author would like to thank Victoria Nash, Urs Gasser, Joss Wright, Ron Deibert, J.
    [Show full text]
  • Wiki-Reliability: a Large Scale Dataset for Content Reliability on Wikipedia
    Wiki-Reliability: A Large Scale Dataset for Content Reliability on Wikipedia KayYen Wong∗ Miriam Redi Diego Saez-Trumper Outreachy Wikimedia Foundation Wikimedia Foundation Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia London, United Kingdom Barcelona, Spain [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT Wikipedia is the largest online encyclopedia, used by algorithms and web users as a central hub of reliable information on the web. The quality and reliability of Wikipedia content is maintained by a community of volunteer editors. Machine learning and information retrieval algorithms could help scale up editors’ manual efforts around Wikipedia content reliability. However, there is a lack of large-scale data to support the development of such research. To fill this gap, in this paper, we propose Wiki-Reliability, the first dataset of English Wikipedia articles annotated with a wide set of content reliability issues. To build this dataset, we rely on Wikipedia “templates”. Tem- plates are tags used by expert Wikipedia editors to indicate con- Figure 1: Example of an English Wikipedia page with several tent issues, such as the presence of “non-neutral point of view” template messages describing reliability issues. or “contradictory articles”, and serve as a strong signal for detect- ing reliability issues in a revision. We select the 10 most popular 1 INTRODUCTION reliability-related templates on Wikipedia, and propose an effective method to label almost 1M samples of Wikipedia article revisions Wikipedia is one the largest and most widely used knowledge as positive or negative with respect to each template. Each posi- repositories in the world. People use Wikipedia for studying, fact tive/negative example in the dataset comes with the full article checking and a wide set of different information needs [11].
    [Show full text]
  • Report on Requirements for Usage and Reuse Statistics for GLAM Content
    Report on Requirements for Usage and Reuse Statistics for GLAM Content Author: Maarten Zeinstra, Kennisland 1/19 Report on Requirements for Usage and Reuse Statistics for GLAM Content 1. Table of Contents 1. Table of Contents 2 2. GLAMTools project 3 3. Executive Summary 4 4. Introduction 5 5. Problem definition 6 6. Current status 7 7. Research overview 8 7.1. Questionnaire 8 7.2. Qualitative research on the technical possibilities of GLAM stats 12 7.3. Research conclusions 13 8. Requirements for usage and reuse statistics for GLAM content 14 8.1. High-level requirements 14 8.2. High-level technical requirements 14 8.3. Medium-level technical requirements 15 8.4. Non-functional requirements 15 8.5. Non-requirements / out of scope 15 8.6. Data model 15 9. Next steps 19 2/19 2. GLAMTools project The “Report on requirements for usage and reuse statistics for GLAM content” is part of the Europeana GLAMTools project, a joint Wikimedia Chapters and Europeana project. The purpose of the project is to develop a scalable and maintainable system for mass uploading (open) content from galleries, libraries, archives and museums (henceforth GLAMs) to Wikimedia Commons and to create GLAM-specific requirements for usage statistics. The GLAMTools project is initiated and made possible by financial support from Wikimedia France, Wikimedia UK, Wikimedia Netherlands, and Wikimedia Switzerland. Maarten Zeinstra from Kennisland wrote the research behind this report and the report itself. Kennisland is a Dutch think tank active in the cultural sector, working especially with open content, dissemination of cultural heritage and copyright law and is also a partner in the project.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    NOTES Introduction 1. Robert Kagan to George Packer. Cited in Packer’s The Assassin’s Gate: America In Iraq (Faber and Faber, London, 2006): 38. 2. Stefan Halper and Jonathan Clarke, America Alone: The Neoconservatives and the Global Order (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004): 9. 3. Critiques of the war on terror and its origins include Gary Dorrien, Imperial Designs: Neoconservatism and the New Pax Americana (Routledge, New York and London, 2004); Francis Fukuyama, After the Neocons: America At the Crossroads (Profile Books, London, 2006); Ira Chernus, Monsters to Destroy: The Neoconservative War on Terror and Sin (Paradigm Publishers, Boulder, CO and London, 2006); and Jacob Heilbrunn, They Knew They Were Right: The Rise of the Neocons (Doubleday, New York, 2008). 4. A report of the PNAC, Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century, September 2000: 76. URL: http:// www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf (15 January 2009). 5. On the first generation on Cold War neoconservatives, which has been covered far more extensively than the second, see Gary Dorrien, The Neoconservative Mind: Politics, Culture and the War of Ideology (Temple University Press, Philadelphia, 1993); Peter Steinfels, The Neoconservatives: The Men Who Are Changing America’s Politics (Simon and Schuster, New York, 1979); Murray Friedman, The Neoconservative Revolution: Jewish Intellectuals and the Shaping of Public Policy (Cambridge University Press, New York, 2005); Murray Friedman ed. Commentary in American Life (Temple University Press, Philadelphia, 2005); Mark Gerson, The Neoconservative Vision: From the Cold War to the Culture Wars (Madison Books, Lanham MD; New York; Oxford, 1997); and Maria Ryan, “Neoconservative Intellectuals and the Limitations of Governing: The Reagan Administration and the Demise of the Cold War,” Comparative American Studies, Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • How Trust in Wikipedia Evolves: a Survey of Students Aged 11 to 25
    PUBLISHED QUARTERLY BY THE UNIVERSITY OF BORÅS, SWEDEN VOL. 23 NO. 1, MARCH, 2018 Contents | Author index | Subject index | Search | Home How trust in Wikipedia evolves: a survey of students aged 11 to 25 Josiane Mothe and Gilles Sahut. Introduction. Whether Wikipedia is to be considered a trusted source is frequently questioned in France. This paper reports the results of a survey examining the levels of trust shown by young people aged eleven to twenty- five. Method. We analyse the answers given by 841 young people, aged eleven to twenty-five, to a questionnaire. To our knowledge, this is the largest study ever published on the topic. It focuses on (1) the perception young people have of Wikipedia; (2) the influence teachers and peers have on the young person’s own opinions; and (3) the variation of trends according to the education level. Analysis. All the analysis is based on ANOVA (analysis of variance) to compare the various groups of participants. We detail the results by comparing the various groups of responders and discuss these results in relation to previous studies. Results. Trust in Wikipedia depends on the type of information seeking tasks and on the education level. There are contrasting social judgments of Wikipedia. Students build a representation of a teacher’s expectations on the nature of the sources that they can use and hence the documentary acceptability of Wikipedia. The average trust attributed to Wikipedia for academic tasks could be induced by the tension between the negative academic reputation of the encyclopedia and the mostly positive experience of its credibility.
    [Show full text]
  • Brion Vibber 2011-08-05 Haifa Part I: Editing So Pretty!
    Editing 2.0 MediaWiki's upcoming visual editor and the future of templates Brion Vibber 2011-08-05 Haifa Part I: Editing So pretty! Wikipedia articles can include rich formatting, beyond simple links and images to complex templates to generate tables, pronunciation guides, and all sorts of details. So icky! But when you push that “edit” button, you often come face to face with a giant blob of markup that’s very hard to read. Here we can’t even see the first paragraph of the article until we scroll past several pages of infobox setup. Even fairly straightforward paragraphs start to blur together when you break out the source. The markup is often non-obvious; features that are clearly visible in the rendered view like links and images don’t stand out in the source view, and long inline citations and such can make it harder to find the actual body text you wanted to edit. RTL WTF? As many of you here today will be well aware, the way our markup displays in a raw text editor can also be really problematic for right-to-left scripts like Hebrew and Arabic. It’s very easy to get lost about whether you’ve opened or closed some tag, or whether your list item is starting at the beginning of a line. Without control over the individual pieces, we can’t give any hints to the text editor. RTL A-OK The same text rendered as structured HTML doesn’t have these problems; bullets stay on the right side of their text, and reference citations are distinct entities.
    [Show full text]
  • The Guardian, Noam Chomsky and the Milosevic Lobby - the Henry Jackson Society Archive 16/09/2014 19:35
    The Guardian, Noam Chomsky and the Milosevic Lobby - The Henry Jackson Society Archive 16/09/2014 19:35 Latest Tweet Please wait while our tweets load. If you can't wait - check out what we've been twittering. MoreShare | ShareShareShareShare Publications Policy Pamphlets & Reports Strategic Briefings Backgrounders Letters Conversations Editorials Policy & Research Areas Regions Britain Greater Europe & Eurasia European Union European Neighbourhood Russia & Eurasia The Americas North America Latin America Middle East & Africa Middle East Africa Asia Pacific East Asia South Asia South East Asia & Australia Themes Democracy & Development Environment & Economy Global Security & Terrorism Transatlantic Relations & Defence Events Future Events file:///Users/markohoare/Desktop/MyFiles/Articles/Current%20affairs/HJS/2006ChomskyMilosevic.webarchive Page 1 of 19 The Guardian, Noam Chomsky and the Milosevic Lobby - The Henry Jackson Society Archive 16/09/2014 19:35 Past Events Campaigns & Projects Affiliated Projects Worldview Global Power Europe YPFP London Greater Surbiton APPG Media Centre Online Shop Recommended Reading Email List Sign up here and keep up to date by joining the HJS mailing list Email Sign up HOME > Policy & Research Areas > Regions > Greater Europe & Eurasia > European Neighbourhood The Guardian, Noam Chomsky and the Milosevic Lobby By Marko Attila Hoare, 4th February 2006 Sometimes facts are stranger than fiction. On 31 October 2005, The Guardian published an interview with Noam Chomsky, prophet of coffee- table anti-imperialism and verbal conjuror extraordinaire, carried out by the journalist Emma Brockes, which was highly embarrassing to him. The interview exposed him as having revisionist views in relation to the Srebrenica massacre, which he described as ‘probably overstated’ and which he has minimised at various times and in various ways.
    [Show full text]
  • What We Can Learn from Wikipedia: Why We Should Jump on Board
    Collaborative Librarianship Volume 10 Issue 1 Article 2 6-15-2018 What we can learn from Wikipedia: Why we should jump on board Lori Bowen Ayre Galecia Group, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/collaborativelibrarianship Part of the Library and Information Science Commons Recommended Citation Ayre, Lori Bowen (2018) "What we can learn from Wikipedia: Why we should jump on board," Collaborative Librarianship: Vol. 10 : Iss. 1 , Article 2. Available at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/collaborativelibrarianship/vol10/iss1/2 This Columns is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Collaborative Librarianship by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],[email protected]. Ayre: What We Can Learn from Wikipedia Technology Matters What We Can Learn from Wikipedia: Why We Should Jump Onboard Lori Bowen Ayre ([email protected]) The Galecia Group In an effort to fight conspiracy theories from 4. Wikipedia’s editors should treat each propagating uncontested on YouTube, Susan other with respect and civility Wojcicki, YouTube CEO, announced that con- 5. Wikipedia has no firm rules spiracy videos would be accompanied by “infor- mation cues” to provide an alternate viewpoint. Wikipedia content is a product of the effort of The announcement came during a panel at “hundreds of thousands of people” who write, South by Southwest on March 20th, 2018. improve, and update articles in an effort to keep it “neutral and supported by reliable re- The authoritative resource that would be called sources.”3 It is overwhelmingly made up of vol- upon to both define conspiracy theories and unteer editors with a smaller cadre of volunteers provide the alternative viewpoint on those theo- who have some additional editorial authority.
    [Show full text]
  • Wikimedia Movement Strategy Process
    Wikimedia Movement Strategy Process Gereon Kalkuhl, Nicole Ebber Pre-Wikimania meeting Berlin, June 10, 2017 Stephan Kunz, CC Zero, Unsplash The most notable source of knowledge in the world Beko, CC BY-SA 4.0, Wikimedia Commons 10 thousands of volunteers Martin Kraft, CC BY-SA 4.0, Wikimedia Commons st Data is the oil of the 21 century Addshore, CC Zero, Wikimedia Commons Conserving the past: Wiki loves monuments Shreemilabaj, CC BY-SA 4.0, Wikimedia Commons Shaping copyright Sebastiaan Ter-Burg, CC BY 2.0, Wikimedia Commons Changing society Together with GLAMs Romaine, CC Zero, Wikimedia Commons We’ve come a long way. But where do we go from here? What do we want to build or achieve together over the next 15 years? Niccolò Caranti, CC BY-SA 4.0, Wikimedia Commons Wikimania 2016 in Esino Lario Katherine Maher new WMF ED Wikimedia Movement Strategy Niccolò Caranti, CC BY-SA 4.0, Wikimedia Commons Timeline Before Wikimania Develop Wikimedia’s global strategic direction; “Which mountain do we want to climb?” After Wikimania How can we fill this direction with life? (roles, responsibilities, resources, goals); “How do we climb this mountain?” Andrew Neel, CC Zero, Unsplash Goals for this process As a movement, identify a cohesive direction that aligns and inspires us all on our path to 2030. Build trust within our movement through participation in an open process based on shared power. Better understand the people and institutions that form our movement, those we are not yet reaching, and how their needs may change over the next 13 years.
    [Show full text]