From majava at ifi.uio.no Thu Jul 1 10:44:18 2010 From: majava at ifi.uio.no (Maja van der Velden) Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 10:44:18 +0200 Subject: Wikipedia archive? Message-ID: <7227C776-F8D8-43A6-BE40-3F9D624381FD@ifi.uio.no> Hi, Can someone help me with this? I am looking for the date (month, year) that a an article with the title Indigenous_knowledge was created in Wikipedia. I know it has merged with another article in 2005. In the Internet Archive I can only find a readable copy of the page in 2005, but the history of the page is not archived, so I am stuck. Is there a place in Wikipedia were deleted or merged pages are kept? Thanks a lot! Greetings, Maja From niesyto at fk615.uni-siegen.de Thu Jul 1 11:54:33 2010 From: niesyto at fk615.uni-siegen.de (Niesyto, Johanna) Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 11:54:33 +0200 Subject: Wikipedia archive? In-Reply-To: <7227C776-F8D8-43A6-BE40-3F9D624381FD@ifi.uio.no> References: <7227C776-F8D8-43A6-BE40-3F9D624381FD@ifi.uio.no> Message-ID: <4109080A6B8F554E9C8EFDCA3DE7500FC77275E702@MAIL40.uni-siegen.de> see http://toolserver.org/~daniel/WikiSense/Contributors.php?wikilang=en&wikifam=.wikipedia.org&page=Indigenous_knowledge&since=&until=&order=-rev_timestamp&max=100&order=rev_timestamp&format=html Universit?t Siegen Fachbereich 1 / Politikwissenschaft Adolf-Reichwein-Stra?e 2 Raum AR-B 2217 57068 Siegen Tel.: 0271 / 740 2279 Tel.: 0221 / 453 963 22 Website: http://www.protest-cultures.uni-siegen.de Website: http://www.consumer-participation.uni-siegen.de Website: http://transnationalspaces.wordpress.com ________________________________________ Von: cpov-bounces at listcultures.org [cpov-bounces at listcultures.org] im Auftrag von Maja van der Velden [majava at ifi.uio.no] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 1. Juli 2010 10:44 An: cpov at listcultures.org Betreff: Wikipedia archive? Hi, Can someone help me with this? I am looking for the date (month, year) that a an article with the title Indigenous_knowledge was created in Wikipedia. I know it has merged with another article in 2005. In the Internet Archive I can only find a readable copy of the page in 2005, but the history of the page is not archived, so I am stuck. Is there a place in Wikipedia were deleted or merged pages are kept? Thanks a lot! Greetings, Maja _______________________________________________ Cpov_listcultures.org mailing list Cpov_listcultures.org at p10.alfaservers.com http://p10.alfaservers.com/mailman/listinfo/cpov_listcultures.org From niesyto at fk615.uni-siegen.de Thu Jul 1 12:07:51 2010 From: niesyto at fk615.uni-siegen.de (Niesyto, Johanna) Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 12:07:51 +0200 Subject: schedule of wikimania is posted Message-ID: <4109080A6B8F554E9C8EFDCA3DE7500FC77275E704@MAIL40.uni-siegen.de> http://wikimania2010.wikimedia.org/wiki/Schedule Universit?t Siegen Fachbereich 1 / Politikwissenschaft Adolf-Reichwein-Stra?e 2 Raum AR-B 2217 57068 Siegen Tel.: 0271 / 740 2279 Tel.: 0221 / 453 963 22 Website: http://www.protest-cultures.uni-siegen.de Website: http://www.consumer-participation.uni-siegen.de Website: http://transnationalspaces.wordpress.com From sethf at sethf.com Sun Jul 4 18:16:08 2010 From: sethf at sethf.com (Seth Finkelstein) Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2010 12:16:08 -0400 Subject: 2010 Wikimedia Study of Controversial Content Message-ID: <20100704161608.GA5544@sethf.com> Members of this list might be interested in following the issues associated with the "2010 Wikimedia Study of Controversial Content" http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2010_Wikimedia_Study_of_Controversial_Content http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:2010_Wikimedia_Study_of_Controversial_Content Allow me to introduce myself. I'm Robert Harris. I'm the consultant that's been asked by the Wikimedia Foundation to conduct the research study outlined in the resolution posted on June 24 by Michael Snow, http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-June/059451.html and further discussed by his series of FAQs http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-June/059452.html I'd like to use this page to be something of a clearing house for information about the study, where I can post the research I'm amassing for the Board, answer questions about what I'm doing (to the best of my ability), and provide a forum for all Wikipedians to discuss the various relevant issues at play. ... What are the issues you've been asked to look at? Basically, I'm dividing my work into two related, but distinct segments. The first is to look at the whole question of potentially sensitive and controversial content within the projects. However, having said this, much of the work, I believe, although not all, will center around images rather than text. The role of sexual images within this universe is undoubted ? to what extent the questions surrounding appropriate and inappropriate sexual images stands for the larger question of controversial images in general I'm still struggling with. (I can argue it both ways). I fully realize that the question of the appropriateness of certain kinds of images, sexual and other, is not new in the projects. One of the very first posts to a Commons discussion group more than half a decade ago raised many of the very same issues that are being discussed today by Commons editors and administrators. However, I am hoping that I might be able to provide a bit of a fresh look at some of the issues, by bringing to bear policies current in other areas of the Wikimedia universe (and in other communities, online and offline) to these discussions. Secondly, I'm going to look at the wide range of issues surrounding the relationship of children, their parents, and their educational institutions to Wikimedia projects. Although some of the issues in this part of the project overlap with those outlined above, I'm separating the discussion in my own mind. The question of the relationship of the projects to children encompasses many aspects ? from questions of treatment of sensitive content on the one hand to the kind of discussions I'm following on Foundation-l about the advisability of creating special kids's sites within the Wikimedia universe. The question of the relationship of children to the projects cannot be simply centered on restriction; it must balance outreaching and protecting elements, I believe. -- Seth Finkelstein Consulting Programmer sethf at sethf.com http://sethf.com See _Guardian_ columns at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/sethfinkelstein From geert at xs4all.nl Mon Jul 5 09:56:43 2010 From: geert at xs4all.nl (Geert Lovink) Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2010 09:56:43 +0200 Subject: who wants to host a cpov-type wikipedia research conference? Message-ID: <83D07DB7-3466-44A4-85FC-EA4AA3E83F2E@xs4all.nl> Dear all, some of you will meet in Gdansk, later on this week. CPOV will have some presence there. The CPOV reader is coming together quite well. First drafts are arriving. Due to the summer here in Amsterdam real copy editing work will be done in September-October when all the texts will be in and in a final shape. We hope to bring it out before the year's end. If you run across material or have recently started writing an interesting article, please feel free to contact juliana at networkcultures.org. As you might know there is a CPOV conference on the German-speaking Wikipedia in Leipzig (D) on September 25-26. We're now also looking for a host to do a next international meeting, somewhere in 2011. If you're interested you can contact me, Nate, Johanna or Nishant. All the best from Amsterdam, Geert From juliana at networkcultures.org Wed Jul 7 11:27:14 2010 From: juliana at networkcultures.org (Juliana Brunello) Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2010 11:27:14 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Wikitrust Message-ID: <1596.145.92.114.80.1278494834.squirrel@webmail.sonologic.nl> Wikitrust is a very interesting tool that shows you "the origin and author of every word of a wiki, as well as a measure of text trust that indicates the extent with which text has been revised". you can check the official website at http://sites.google.com/site/ucscwikitrust/home and my blog post about it at http://networkcultures.org/wpmu/cpov/2010/07/07/wikitrust-reduces-oracle-ilusion/ best, Juliana Institute of Network Cultures HvA Interactive Media t: +31 (0)20 595 18 66 f: +31 (0)20 595 18 40 www.networkcultures.org From niesyto at fk615.uni-siegen.de Mon Jul 12 14:42:31 2010 From: niesyto at fk615.uni-siegen.de (Niesyto, Johanna) Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 14:42:31 +0200 Subject: sharing summaries, sharing experiences Message-ID: <4109080A6B8F554E9C8EFDCA3DE7500FC77275E760@MAIL40.uni-siegen.de> hello everybody the presence of researchers on this year's wikimania was again very obvious; also the wikisym took place at about the same time. within wikimania researchers presented some findings to Wikipedians: * http://wikimania2010.wikimedia.org/wiki/Submissions/The_State_of_Wikimedia_Scholarship:_2009-2010 Also they called for sharing summaries about growing Wikipedia research * http://acawiki.org/Home Also a panel addressed specifically the question of research ethics in which amongst other things the question of anonymity/pseudonymity was raised * http://wikimania2010.wikimedia.org/wiki/Submissions/Academic_Researchers_in_Wikimedia_Communities:_Ethics,_Methods,_and_Policies (it was called to continue the discussion on wiki research-l and discussion user experiences). bests johanna From juliana at networkcultures.org Thu Jul 15 12:49:37 2010 From: juliana at networkcultures.org (Juliana Brunello) Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 12:49:37 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Some articles for further thought Message-ID: <2237.145.92.114.148.1279190977.squirrel@webmail.sonologic.nl> What Working for Wikipedia Taught Me About Collaboration http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2010/07/what-working-for-wikipedia-taught-me-about-collaboration194.html This article presents a very optmistic view concerning crowdsourcing and wikipedia in general. Seth Finkelstein responded to it and has used, once againg, the word 'cult' to describe WP. Whither the Wikis? http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/07/14/wikis Can the wiki model work in academia? How? Is Wikipedia really just for amateurs? Wiki learns a lesson in Bengali http://www.telegraphindia.com/1100714/jsp/frontpage/story_12681775.jsp Different language, different community - different 'experiment'? Juliana Institute of Network Cultures HvA Interactive Media t: +31 (0)20 595 18 66 f: +31 (0)20 595 18 40 www.networkcultures.org From geert at xs4all.nl Thu Jul 15 15:59:52 2010 From: geert at xs4all.nl (Geert Lovink) Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 15:59:52 +0200 Subject: Dare to Quote! On Zizek and Wikipedia Message-ID: <0B982C29-F031-4E37-BB60-A0D6E0879235@xs4all.nl> Reading Slavoj Zizek's 2010 Living in the End Times book, I noticed the author quoting Wikipedia a number of times. No big deal, you would say but it is significant in the light of ongoing controversy around Wikipedia as a reliable (academic) source. Zizek is considered a leading intellectual, and arguably Europe's most famous philosopher of the baby boomers (b. 1949). This postwar generation entered their professional lives in the age of the (electronic) type writer, well before the introduction of the personal computer. If a critic like Zizek includes Wikipedia in his verbal stream of conciousness it is a sign of the times that Wikipedia has become an integral part of our media environment. So far, in the case of Zizek, referenced media have been been books, followed by feature films. Forget newspapers, television and radio, or hearsay conversations and correspondences. If Zizek starts telling stories it is based on contemporary myths and current affairs that are supposed to be known to all of us, written down without detailed references. If Zizek starts to theorize he talks aloud, like in a bar, and it is this oral, narrative element that constitutes his philosophy. To include Wikipedia in these rants is part of a significant cultural shift and it is odd that Zizek himself is unaware of this Event. Naive or not, it is As far as I know Zizek has not yet written at length about the internet, mobile phones, e-readers or computer games. What in Living in the End Times resurfaces is his fascination for post-humanism and techno-gnosis. The example analyzed in this book it is MIT's Sixth Sense research program ("wearable gestural interface that augments the physical world around us with digital information and lets us use natural hand gestures to interact with that information"). Much like Zizek's analysis of early 90s Virtual Reality it is in particular the embodiment of information that interests the psycho analyst. Zzek cannot distinguish between networked communicatio and the 'virtual architecture' (if possible in 3D) of Second Life or World of Warcraft. The invisible, non-representational nature of new media falls outside of Zizek's theory scope. Zizek is not the only theorist we can blame for the confusion between cyberspace and virtual reality. But twenty years onwards you would think that someone could have given Zizek a basic update what has happened in the world of new media. Libertarians are indeed featured (Ayn Rand) but the Silicon Valley techno-libertarian religion is not an object of study for Zizek. It is in particular the dark, apocalyptic side of Ray Kurzweil that interests Zizek, not Google. An interesting example of his blind spot for the networked nature of capitalism is on display in Zizek's visit to Google's Mountain View headquarters where he spoke during the Authors at Google lunch series in October 2008. Zizek is the perfect example if you want to show how little cultural studies and film theories have to say about the internet. As Zizek recently admitted to The Guardian: "I am a good Hegelian. If you have a good theory, forget about the reality." The problem in this case is that Zizek not even as a basic set of critical notions, let alone a theory. This could be reason why he remains silence about it in his books. All the more interesting that In Living in the End Times we can find at least five references to Wikipedia (always without URL). The books also refers to used internet sources in thirteen footnotes in which he does point to actual web locations but forgets to mention dates or author names. The editors at Verso Books did not include Wikipedia in the index. They did include 'internet' with three page references, but none of them are significant, idea-wise. "He is very much a thinker for our turbulent, high speed, information-led lives," Sophie Fiennes remarks in the same Guardian piece. Sure, but it is a pitty that when Zizek will eventually slow down to write his real Magnus Opus its topic will be Hegel and not the internet. From jawbrey at att.net Thu Jul 15 16:06:48 2010 From: jawbrey at att.net (Jon Awbrey) Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 10:06:48 -0400 Subject: Living In The End Of Minds In-Reply-To: <0B982C29-F031-4E37-BB60-A0D6E0879235@xs4all.nl> References: <0B982C29-F031-4E37-BB60-A0D6E0879235@xs4all.nl> Message-ID: <4C3F15F8.2080909@att.net> Geert Lovink wrote: > > Reading Slavoj Zizek's 2010 ''Living in the End Times'' book, > I noticed the author quoting Wikipedia a number of times. > No big deal, you would say but it is significant in the > light of ongoing controversy around Wikipedia as a > reliable (academic) source. Zizek is considered > a leading intellectual, and arguably Europe's > most famous philosopher of the baby boomers > (b. 1949). This postwar generation entered > their professional lives in the age of the > (electronic) type writer, well before the > introduction of the personal computer. > If a critic like Zizek includes > Wikipedia in his verbal stream > of conciousness it is a sign > of the times that Wikipedia > has become an integral part > of our media environment. Kind of like ''Peanuts'' cartoons ... Jon ;) -- inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/ mwb: http://www.mywikibiz.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey knol: http://knol.google.com/k/-/-/3fkwvf69kridz/1 oeiswiki: http://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey From sethf at sethf.com Fri Jul 16 00:27:01 2010 From: sethf at sethf.com (Seth Finkelstein) Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 18:27:01 -0400 Subject: Some articles for further thought Message-ID: <20100715222701.GA31944@sethf.com> > Juliana Brunello > This article presents a very optimistic view concerning crowdsourcing > and wikipedia in general. Seth Finkelstein responded to it and has > used, once again, the word 'cult' to describe WP. Indeed I did. But do note more of the context: Quoting the author: "Trust the Crowd; Its Smarter than You" My brief riposte: "Nonsense. Crowds are notoriously dumb. Wikipedia is not a "crowd" - it's a cult. So, I was responding to the idea of a "crowd" which is a "smarter than you", where the characterization "cult" seems quite fitting alongside that idea. But rather than noting that in a brief comment I "once again" used the c-word, I think it more significant to draw attention to, well, let me say that portions of the article seem quite at variance with my understanding of events, and I do not think the author will respond to my challenge to substantiate part of her account. In specific, in the aftermath of the scandal about a very high-ranking Wikipedia administrator falsely claiming to be a professor, including lying about it to the _New Yorker_, this claim is made: "In fact, in the months that followed, I found the community became self-correcting by encouraging the use of real names and identities. It found a way to help prevent this type of issue from happening again." I said: "Please provide some evidence this in fact happened broadly, as opposed to a few extremely narrow contexts. There are several examples that gainsay it." One could perhaps carefully parse and redefine the above claim, but it seems to me at best extremely overreaching in terms of the meaning an ordinary reader would take from it. FYI, in a second comment, I recommended the column I wrote about that scandal: "Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practise to deceive" http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/mar/08/media.comment "Frequently, what is naively viewed as spontaneous generation is in fact the product of a relatively small number of people who have been induced to provide a huge amount of unpaid labour. The lifeblood of Wikipedia is selling heavy contributors a dream that their donated effort will give them the prestige of an academic." -- Seth Finkelstein Consulting Programmer sethf at sethf.com http://sethf.com See _Guardian_ columns at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/sethfinkelstein From jawbrey at att.net Fri Jul 16 04:32:38 2010 From: jawbrey at att.net (Jon Awbrey) Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 22:32:38 -0400 Subject: Some articles for further thought In-Reply-To: <20100715222701.GA31944@sethf.com> References: <20100715222701.GA31944@sethf.com> Message-ID: <4C3FC4C6.200@att.net> CPOVers, That "article" by Sandra Ordonez is a bit of PR fluff, written by a PR jobber who is exhibiting her PR wares to the next potential employer. Fare enough, that's what PR people do. But any real journalist ought to be embarrassed to be writing such soft-soap in 2010. Jon Awbrey Seth Finkelstein wrote: >> Juliana Brunello >> This article presents a very optimistic view concerning crowdsourcing >> and wikipedia in general. Seth Finkelstein responded to it and has >> used, once again, the word 'cult' to describe WP. > > Indeed I did. But do note more of the context: > > Quoting the author: "Trust the Crowd; Its Smarter than You" > > My brief riposte: "Nonsense. Crowds are notoriously dumb. Wikipedia is not a "crowd" - it's a cult. > > So, I was responding to the idea of a "crowd" which is a > "smarter than you", where the characterization "cult" seems quite > fitting alongside that idea. > > But rather than noting that in a brief comment I "once again" > used the c-word, I think it more significant to draw attention to, > well, let me say that portions of the article seem quite at variance > with my understanding of events, and I do not think the author will > respond to my challenge to substantiate part of her account. In > specific, in the aftermath of the scandal about a very high-ranking > Wikipedia administrator falsely claiming to be a professor, including > lying about it to the _New Yorker_, this claim is made: > > "In fact, in the months that followed, I found the community became > self-correcting by encouraging the use of real names and identities. > It found a way to help prevent this type of issue from happening again." > > I said: "Please provide some evidence this in fact happened > broadly, as opposed to a few extremely narrow contexts. There are > several examples that gainsay it." > > One could perhaps carefully parse and redefine the above > claim, but it seems to me at best extremely overreaching in terms of > the meaning an ordinary reader would take from it. > > FYI, in a second comment, I recommended the column I wrote > about that scandal: > > "Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practise to deceive" > http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/mar/08/media.comment > > "Frequently, what is naively viewed as spontaneous generation is in > fact the product of a relatively small number of people who have been > induced to provide a huge amount of unpaid labour. The lifeblood of > Wikipedia is selling heavy contributors a dream that their donated > effort will give them the prestige of an academic." > -- inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/ mwb: http://www.mywikibiz.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey knol: http://knol.google.com/k/-/-/3fkwvf69kridz/1 oeiswiki: http://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey From thekohser at gmail.com Fri Jul 16 22:43:20 2010 From: thekohser at gmail.com (Gregory Kohs) Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 16:43:20 -0400 Subject: Some articles for further thought Message-ID: Quoting the author (Sandra Ordonez): "Trust the Crowd; Its Smarter than You" +++++++ I should hope Ordonez trusts the crowd, because they will more likely understand better than her the use of an apostrophe in the contraction "it's". Haven't myself read the article yet, but I'm sure it will make me puke a little in my mouth. -- Gregory Kohs Cell: 302.463.1354 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jawbrey at att.net Sun Jul 18 17:25:27 2010 From: jawbrey at att.net (Jon Awbrey) Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2010 11:25:27 -0400 Subject: The Wikipedia Cult / Focal Problem / Banning In-Reply-To: <4C07FD32.1080409@att.net> References: <4C07FD32.1080409@att.net> Message-ID: <4C431CE7.5060906@att.net> CPOViewers, I've been meaning to get back to this exploration of focal problems in Wikipediatrics, but a couple of ongoing family crises have been keeping my wits scattered all over the map ... The perception that Wikipedism is far more cult-like in its basic character than anything advertised as a knowledge-oriented enterprise ought to be has of course arisen on many occasions, but here is a reminder of the occasion that we came in with this time around: Re: http://p10.alfaservers.com/pipermail/cpov_listcultures.org/2010-June/000185.html AS = Alan Shapiro JA = Jon Awbrey AS: Well, that's a very intelligent and balanced statement (except for the first three words, which are themselves a binary opposition, you're taking the position that there is absolutely no truth in what I am saying?). I applaud this statement. It is much more reasonable than most of the assertions in the recent avalanche of declarations coming on this listserv. ... JA: Being a Peircean pragmatic thinker, by virtue or maybe by dint of long-continuing auto-inculcation, I can't help coloring outside the lines of dyadic thinking for very long, so let me let that business pass. JA: One of the lessons that my teachers pounded into my head over many long years of alio-inculcation was that education and inquiry have as much to do with process as product, as much to do with conduct as content. JA: Wikipedia, just to take up the current example, begins to look like a very different proposition when we start to examine the reality of practice that prevails in its orbit. JA: Maybe it would help to focus, one by one, on particular practices that distinguish Wikipedia Culture from other systems that we know? JA: One practice that is very symptomatic of cults, dogmatic organizations, faith-oriented groups, religions, sects, whatever you want to call them, is the practice of banning, shunning, or excommunicating onetime members of the group, members who were once considered "good faith" participants. That brings us to the focal problem of Banning, Shunning, Excommunicating ... If you look at the amount of time that Wikipedists devote to filtering out inputs from "taboo" or "unclean" sources, you can't help but admit that the practices of banning, blocking, censoring, excommunicating, shunning, and generally plugging their fingers in their ears is one of the most significant features, or bugs, of Wikipedism as a social system. The question is -- What's that all about? Jon Awbrey -- inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/ mwb: http://www.mywikibiz.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey knol: http://knol.google.com/k/-/-/3fkwvf69kridz/1 oeiswiki: http://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey From juliana at networkcultures.org Wed Jul 21 10:57:01 2010 From: juliana at networkcultures.org (Juliana Brunello) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 10:57:01 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Interview with Felipe Ortega Message-ID: <1724.145.92.114.115.1279702621.squirrel@webmail.sonologic.nl> Dear CPoV-List, there is a new interview at our blog with Felipe Ortega. http://networkcultures.org/wpmu/cpov/lang/de/2010/07/21/interview-with-felipe-ortega/ Best, Juliana Institute of Network Cultures HvA Interactive Media t: +31 (0)20 595 18 66 f: +31 (0)20 595 18 40 www.networkcultures.org