Debating Information Control in Web 2.0. The Case of Wikipedia vs. Citizendium

From WikiLit
Jump to: navigation, search
Publication (help)
Debating Information Control in Web 2.0: The Case of Wikipedia vs. Citizendium
Authors: Olof Sundin, Jutta Haider [edit item]
Citation: Proceedings of the ASIS&T Annual Meeting. ASIS&T Annual Meeting: Joining Research and Practice: Social Computing and Information Science 44 (1): 1-7. 2007 October 19-24. Milwaukee.
Publication type: Conference paper
Peer-reviewed: Yes
Database(s):
DOI: 10.1002/meet.1450440333.
Google Scholar cites: Citations
Link(s):
Added by Wikilit team: No
Search
Article: Google Scholar BASE PubMed
Other scholarly wikis: AcaWiki Brede Wiki WikiPapers
Web search: Bing Google Yahoo!Google PDF
Other:
Services
Format: BibTeX
Debating Information Control in Web 2.0: The Case of Wikipedia vs. Citizendium is a publication by Olof Sundin, Jutta Haider.


[edit] Abstract

Wikipedia is continually being scrutinised for the quality of its content The question addressed in this paper concerns which notions of information, of collaborative knowledge creation, of authority and of the role of the expert are drawn on when information control in WP is discussed. This is done by focusing on the arguments made in the debates surrounding the launch of Citizendium, a proposed new collaborative online encyclopaedia. While Wikipedia claims not to attribute special status to any of its contributors, Citizendium intends to assign a decision-making role to subject experts. The empirical material for the present study consists of two online threads available from Slashdot. One, "A Look inside Citizendium", dates from September, the second one "Co-Founder Forks Wikipedia" from October 2006. The textual analysis of these documents was carried out through close interpretative reading. Five themes, related to different aspects of information control emerged: 1.information types, 2.information responsibility, 3. information perspectives, 4. information organisation, 5. information provenance & creation. Each theme contains a number of different positions. It was found that these positions not necessarily correspond with the different sides of the argument. Instead, at times the fault lines run through the two camps.

[edit] Research questions

Research details

Topics: Encyclopedias, Policies and governance, Social order, Ranking and popularity [edit item]
Domains: Information science, Library science [edit item]
Theory type: N/A [edit item]
Wikipedia coverage: Other [edit item]
Theories: [edit item]
Research design: Content analysis, Discourse analysis [edit item]
Data source: Websites [edit item]
Collected data time dimension: N/A [edit item]
Unit of analysis: N/A [edit item]
Wikipedia data extraction: N/A [edit item]
Wikipedia page type: N/A [edit item]
Wikipedia language: N/A [edit item]

[edit] Conclusion

"It is obvious that Web 2.0 environments in general and the Wiki platform in particular open up an important discussion on information control and its bearing on the blurred distinction between consumers, mediators and producers of information.


Furthermore, by bringing out the multi-faceted nature of information control in Web 2.0, or more specifically of its perception, the present analysis also highlights some of the challenges individuals are faced with in their different roles in contemporary online environments; challenges arising from the unstable nature of abstract knowledge systems and a consequent need for increased reflexivity. Inevitably, it seems to us, this also has bearings on how we understand the ways in which people in current and future online environments create trust and reflect upon authority, an issue that requires further deliberation in future research."

[edit] Comments


Further notes[edit]

Facts about "Debating Information Control in Web 2.0. The Case of Wikipedia vs. Citizendium"RDF feed
AbstractWikipedia is continually being scrutinisedWikipedia is continually being scrutinised for the quality of its content The question addressed in this paper concerns which notions of information, of collaborative knowledge creation, of authority and of the role of the expert are drawn on when information control in WP is discussed. This is done by focusing on the arguments made in the debates surrounding the launch of Citizendium, a proposed new collaborative online encyclopaedia. While Wikipedia claims not to attribute special status to any of its contributors, Citizendium intends to assign a decision-making role to subject experts. The empirical material for the present study consists of two online threads available from Slashdot. One, "A Look inside Citizendium", dates from September, the second one "Co-Founder Forks Wikipedia" from October 2006. The textual analysis of these documents was carried out through close interpretative reading. Five themes, related to different aspects of information control emerged: 1.information types, 2.information responsibility, 3. information perspectives, 4. information organisation, 5. information provenance & creation. Each theme contains a number of different positions. It was found that these positions not necessarily correspond with the different sides of the argument. Instead, at times the fault lines run through the two camps.the fault lines run through the two camps.
Added by wikilit teamNo +
Collected data time dimensionN/A +
ConclusionIt is obvious that Web 2.0 environments inIt is obvious that Web 2.0 environments in general and the Wiki platform in particular open up an important discussion on information control and its bearing on the blurred distinction between consumers, mediators and producers of information.


Furthermore, by bringing out the multi-faceted nature of information control in Web 2.0, or more specifically of its perception, the present analysis also highlights some of the challenges individuals are faced with in their different roles in contemporary online environments; challenges arising from the unstable nature of abstract knowledge systems and a consequent need for increased reflexivity. Inevitably, it seems to us, this also has bearings on how we understand the ways in which people in current and future online environments create trust and reflect upon authority, an issue that requires further deliberation in future research.
s further deliberation in future research.
Conference locationMilwaukee +
Data sourceWebsites +
Dates19-24 +
Doi10.1002/meet.1450440333 +
Google scholar urlhttp://scholar.google.com/scholar?ie=UTF-8&q=%22Debating%2BInformation%2BControl%2Bin%2BWeb%2B2.0%3A%2BThe%2BCase%2Bof%2BWikipedia%2Bvs.%2BCitizendium%22 +
Has authorOlof Sundin + and Jutta Haider +
Has domainInformation science + and Library science +
Has topicEncyclopedias +, Policies and governance +, Social order + and Ranking and popularity +
Issue1 +
MonthOctober +
Pages1-7 +
Peer reviewedYes +
Publication typeConference paper +
Published inProceedings of the ASIS&T Annual Meeting. ASIS&T Annual Meeting: Joining Research and Practice: Social Computing and Information Science +
Research designContent analysis + and Discourse analysis +
Revid10,728 +
Theory typeN/A +
TitleDebating Information Control in Web 2.0: The Case of Wikipedia vs. Citizendium
Unit of analysisN/A +
Volume44 +
Wikipedia coverageOther +
Wikipedia data extractionN/A +
Wikipedia languageN/A +
Wikipedia page typeN/A +
Year2007 +