tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12886811.post4972891503804994750..comments2024-03-06T19:01:26.120-08:00Comments on Durova: The secret Wikipedia cabalLise Broerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15087397520904837725noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12886811.post-2493465290273530362008-06-02T18:38:00.000-07:002008-06-02T18:38:00.000-07:00Wikipedia could have been an exemplary Community o...Wikipedia could have been an exemplary Community of Practice.<BR/><BR/>What is a Community of Practice you ask?<BR/><BR/>It's a community project that falls somewhere in between a mere Community of Interest and a world-class Center of Excellence.<BR/><BR/>Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger wrote the book on Communities of Practice.<BR/><BR/>It's a book I wish more Wikipedians were familiar with. All too often, the site operates more like a community of <I>malpractice</I>. <BR/><BR/>Whether it's too late to turn the juggernaut around is hard to say. What troubles me is that there doesn't even appear to be much <I>desire</I> to turn it around.Moultonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14800784950094043498noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12886811.post-37053526369762160192008-06-02T18:18:00.000-07:002008-06-02T18:18:00.000-07:00I think a major reason for the scrutiny directed t...I think a major reason for the scrutiny directed towards Wikipedia is that its content-generation model has a lot of inherent problems that have yet to be satisfactorily addressed."Steve Smith"https://www.blogger.com/profile/00619594380611546733noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12886811.post-8910430601052879732008-06-02T15:09:00.000-07:002008-06-02T15:09:00.000-07:00Joshua, although I believe you make a point (I thi...Joshua, although I believe you make a point (I think it was Erik Moeller that recently commented that most media mentions are "overwhelmingly positive" ?), there's still significantly more "scrutinizing" of Wikimedia projects than many random volunteer-driven projects (you don't hear copy-yelling about the wikia projects, even though they technically indulge in far, far more of it), especially from the point of view of Wikipedians themselves. Even so, most of the analysis is still very sound to me. <BR/><BR/>It boils down to the fact that Wikipedia is at forefront of the entire Internet and knowledge paradigm shift, and is basically a kickstart for a debate that had been previously ignored by the establishment.Circéushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09840777830724271371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12886811.post-40105578000385785922008-06-02T14:25:00.000-07:002008-06-02T14:25:00.000-07:00There's a basic assumption in your essay that I th...There's a basic assumption in your essay that I think is incorrect: You imply that there is disproportionate scrutiny of Wikipedia. I suspect that it may simply seem that way since you are very involved in Wikipedia. I suspect that if you looked in detail at the other leading websites with high Alexa rankings you'd find they get about the same order of magnitude of examination and criticism as Wikipedia. For example, Op-eds in major newspapers criticizing Google, Yahoo and Myspace are much more common than ones criticizing Wikipedia.Joshuahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00637936588223855248noreply@blogger.com