Identifying and understanding the problems of Wikipedia's peer governance: the case of inclusionists versus deletionists

From WikiLit
Jump to: navigation, search
Publication (help)
Identifying and understanding the problems of Wikipedia's peer governance: the case of inclusionists versus deletionists
Authors: Vasilis Kostakis [edit item]
Citation: First Monday 15 (3): 14. 2010 March.
Publication type: Journal article
Peer-reviewed: Yes
Database(s):
DOI: Define doi.
Google Scholar cites: Citations
Link(s): Paper link
Added by Wikilit team: Added on initial load
Search
Article: Google Scholar BASE PubMed
Other scholarly wikis: AcaWiki Brede Wiki WikiPapers
Web search: Bing Google Yahoo!Google PDF
Other:
Services
Format: BibTeX
Identifying and understanding the problems of Wikipedia's peer governance: the case of inclusionists versus deletionists is a publication by Vasilis Kostakis.


[edit] Abstract

Wikipedia has been hailed as one of the most prominent peer projects that led to the rise of the concept of peer governance. However, criticism has been levelled against Wikipedia's mode of governance. This paper, using the Wikipedia case as a point of departure and building upon the conflict between inclusionists and deletionists, tries to identify and draw some conclusions on the problematic issue of peer governance.

[edit] Research questions

"This paper, using the Wikipedia case as a point of departure and building upon the conflict between inclusionists and deletionists, tries to identify and draw some conclusions on the problematic issue of peer governance"

Research details

Topics: Policies and governance [edit item]
Domains: Information systems [edit item]
Theory type: Analysis [edit item]
Wikipedia coverage: Case [edit item]
Theories: "Undetermined" [edit item]
Research design: Case study [edit item]
Data source: Interview responses [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: English [edit item]

[edit] Conclusion

"Wikipedia is constantly at risk of transforming itself into an inflexible, despotic hierarchy, while new disputes are emerging about the mode of content creation and governance. As the size of Wikipedia increases (in terms of both content and participants), it becomes more difficult and complex for a relatively small group of administrators to keep track of everything that happens “in the far–flung of the site.” [23] Co–ordination problems on interpersonal and interorganizational levels as well as gaps concerning the interests and the identities of the inter–Wikipedian communities result in governance crises, threatening the sustainability of the project. Active and organized minorities often prevail over the uncoordinated majority and others. Further, the vague distinction among the social and technical powers of administrators — who sometimes take more authoritative roles and make more ‘moral’ decisions about user behavior — leads to power accumulation in one section of the community (Forte and Bruckman, 2008). A functional resolution process for resolving content disputes and an unambiguous community social contract model are needed. Wikipedia may follow some rules regarding content creation, which, however, in some cases are mutually inconsistent and conflicting. Thus, administrators, adept at gaming the system, can pick and choose among rules, and defeat their opponents. Moreover, how do you balance participation and selection for excellence? In other words, “how to make sure that truth does not become the rule of the majority and that expertise can find its place?”"

[edit] Comments

""Wikipedia is constantly at risk of transforming itself into an inflexible, despotic hierarchy, while new disputes are emerging about the mode of content creation and governance""


Further notes[edit]

Facts about "Identifying and understanding the problems of Wikipedia's peer governance: the case of inclusionists versus deletionists"RDF feed
AbstractWikipedia has been hailed as one of the moWikipedia has been hailed as one of the most prominent peer projects that led to the rise of the concept of peer governance. However, criticism has been levelled against Wikipedia's mode of governance. This paper, using the Wikipedia case as a point of departure and building upon the conflict between inclusionists and deletionists, tries to identify and draw some conclusions on the problematic issue of peer governance. the problematic issue of peer governance.
Added by wikilit teamAdded on initial load +
Collected data time dimensionN/A +
Comments"Wikipedia is constantly at risk of transforming itself into an inflexible, despotic hierarchy, while new disputes are emerging about the mode of content creation and governance"
ConclusionWikipedia is constantly at risk of transfoWikipedia is constantly at risk of transforming itself into an inflexible, despotic hierarchy, while new disputes are emerging about the mode of content creation and governance. As the size of Wikipedia increases (in terms of both content and participants), it becomes more difficult and complex for a relatively small group of administrators to keep track of everything that happens “in the far–flung of the site.” [23] Co–ordination problems on interpersonal and interorganizational levels as well as gaps concerning the interests and the identities of the inter–Wikipedian communities result in governance crises, threatening the sustainability of the project. Active and organized minorities often prevail over the uncoordinated majority and others. Further, the vague distinction among the social and technical powers of administrators — who sometimes take more authoritative roles and make more ‘moral’ decisions about user behavior — leads to power accumulation in one section of the community (Forte and Bruckman, 2008). A functional resolution process for resolving content disputes and an unambiguous community social contract model are needed. Wikipedia may follow some rules regarding content creation, which, however, in some cases are mutually inconsistent and conflicting. Thus, administrators, adept at gaming the system, can pick and choose among rules, and defeat their opponents. Moreover, how do you balance participation and selection for excellence? In other words, “how to make sure that truth does not become the rule of the majority and that expertise can find its place?”ty and that expertise can find its place?”
Data sourceInterview responses +
Google scholar urlhttp://scholar.google.com/scholar?ie=UTF-8&q=%22Identifying%2Band%2Bunderstanding%2Bthe%2Bproblems%2Bof%2BWikipedia%27s%2Bpeer%2Bgovernance%3A%2Bthe%2Bcase%2Bof%2Binclusionists%2Bversus%2Bdeletionists%22 +
Has authorVasilis Kostakis +
Has domainInformation systems +
Has topicPolicies and governance +
Issue3 +
MonthMarch +
Pages14 +
Peer reviewedYes +
Publication typeJournal article +
Published inFirst Monday +
Research designCase study +
Research questionsThis paper, using the Wikipedia case as a point of departure and building upon the conflict between inclusionists and deletionists, tries to identify and draw some conclusions on the problematic issue of peer governance
Revid11,532 +
TheoriesUndetermined
Theory typeAnalysis +
TitleIdentifying and understanding the problems of Wikipedia's peer governance: the case of inclusionists versus deletionists
Unit of analysisN/A +
Urlhttp://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2613/2479 +
Volume15 +
Wikipedia coverageCase +
Wikipedia data extractionN/A +
Wikipedia languageEnglish +
Wikipedia page typeN/A +
Year2010 +