|Conflict and consensus in the Chinese version of Wikipedia|
|Citation:||IEEE Technology and Society Magazine 28 (2): 49-56. 2009.|
|Publication type:||Journal article|
|Google Scholar cites:||Not available|
|Added by Wikilit team:||Added on initial load|
|Article:||Google Scholar BASE PubMed|
|Other scholarly wikis:||AcaWiki Brede Wiki WikiPapers|
|Web search:||Bing Google Yahoo! — Google PDF|
It is not easy to initiate a new language version of Wikipedia. Although anyone can propose a new language version without financial cost, certain Wikipedia policies for establishing a new language version must be followed . Once approved and created, the new language version needs tools to facilitate writing and reading in the new language. Even if a team tackles these technical and linguistic issues, a nascent community has to then develop its own editorial and administrative policies and guidelines, sometimes by translating and ratifying the policies in another language version (usually English). Given that Wikipedia does not impose an universal set of editorial and administrative policies and guidelines, the cultural and political nature of such communities remains open-ended.
"Conflict and consensus in the Chinese version of Wikipedia"
|Topics:||Cultural and linguistic effects on participation|
|Wikipedia coverage:||Main topic|
|Research design:||Statistical analysis|
|Data source:||Wikipedia pages|
|Collected data time dimension:||Cross-sectional|
|Unit of analysis:||Language|
|Wikipedia data extraction:||Live Wikipedia|
|Wikipedia page type:||Article|
"The case of CW thus raises several issues of “media citizenship” and “technological citizenship” of the emergent cross-regional usergenerated content. From the case of CW, this article agrees with : voice and participation is suitable for understanding the basis of user-generated content. But the complicated state-media-citizen relationships in and between China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan still haunt the polity of CW. Still, CW’s resilience in maintaining a shared public space between otherwise balkanized regions of Chinese speakers cannot be overlooked. It has laid some foundations in areas such as orthographic co-existence, automatic conversion, pro-diversity policies, and communicative rationality— qualities that arguably have Table II Some Indexes for the Offline Political Environment of the Four Regions. Regions Networked Readiness Index1 Democracy World Ranking2 Free Speech World Ranking3 Major Human Rights Violation4 Internet Filtered by Beijing (or so-called Great Firewall) Political Internet Filtering5 Mainland 59 138 163 Yes YES Pervasive Singapore 5 84 141 No No No evidence of filtering Hong Kong 22 78 61 No No Included in Mainland Taiwan 13 32 32 No No N.A. 1 Data from the Networked Readiness Index 2006–2007 Ranking, by World Economic Forum, among 122 countries surveyed . 2 Data from the Economist Intelligence Unit’s index of democracy 2006, with 167 countries are ranked from the top democracies to authoritarian regimes . 3 Data from the Worldwide Press Freedom Index 2007 made by the Reporters without Borders, with 169 countries are ranked . 4 It is nominally determined whether the state in question is mentioned in the Human Rights Watch World Report 2007 . 5 Data from the OpenNet Initiative about Internet filtering of political contents . 56"
"Liaio (2009) studied Chinese Wikipedia (CW) and found it "has shown some of the potentials of remixing citizenship or media citizenship that are not only enabled by the Internet but also unmatched by other state and market players. CW’s attempt to create an 'unbounded citizenship' based on shared yet different Chinese language and knowledge through cross-boundary discussion is arguably unprecedented. In conclusion, participatory user-generated culture has the potential to reconnect participants across the existing polity boundaries within a linguistic space." (p. 56)"