Re: [WikiEN-l] Building a community or building an encyclopedia?
Read this a few days ago, and thought it was really good. Wanted to say that, even if there isn't much more to add. I particularly liked the last bit: We're an educational institution in two senses: we write educational material for the world in general, and we educate each other. Carcharoth On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 6:22 AM, David Goodman dgoodma...@gmail.com wrote: More than maintaining the articles,and more than maintaining the group, the focus should be on maintain the continual and increasing development of new editors and new articles--not just as content creators, but as gnomes, and techies, and admins. The excitement of working here has not just been on our wide influence, but of _developing_ something that will have wide influence, and of developing it in a way which will be self- perpetuating. Many people and many groups have written encyclopedia, but very few have done as we have, developed a new way of creating them, and other material also. This is not a finite project., and will remain a matter not just of replacement , but of further grown. Based on other human institutions, we are not likely to even attain a finished form or a finite bod of knowledge. I think that should be seen here also as what our goal should be. I don't want as much to continue what I do in Wikipedia , as to have others continue it , while I learn new things to do, and find people who will do things that I've not even dreamed of being capable of. If i have a choice between rescuing articles, or rescuing even one editor, It's the editor who matters--in the hope that they will write many articles and in their turn encourage yet more editors. We're an educational institution in two senses: we write educational material forv the world in general, and we educate each other. On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Charles Matthews charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote: On 16/10/2010 15:23, Marc Riddell wrote: On 15/10/2010 22:36, MuZemike wrote: snip That comes to my question regarding whether or not we are here to build an online community or an online encyclopedia. Should we focus outwards toward the reading/viewing audience, or should we focus inwards towards the editors? on 10/16/10 9:01 AM, Charles Matthews at charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote: It was settled early on that we are writing an encyclopedia. Before I started editing. What has happened since then? Well, we have had some divas on the site who have thought that we should focus on things that are basically all about them rather than the encyclopedia. And this has been a strategy partially successful in its own terms. But fundamentally I don't think such people have won the argument, however much harder they may have made it to see the community as primarily a working environment. That's what it remains, a highly interactive place in which to do voluntary work on an encyclopedia. No, Charles, an environment alone does not build an encyclopedia; or, for that matter, any other group project. There are two elements involved: the effort required to work on the substance and goals of the project, and an equal effort to build and maintain the group, yes, the community of persons collaborating to achieve the goals of the project. Think what you like. The actual membership of the group has changed much more than the pages on which matters are discussed, as places to exchange views and information. You also are misreading what I said. Where do I imply alone? Charles ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l -- David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Building a community or building an encyclopedia?
On 17 October 2010 06:22, David Goodman dgoodma...@gmail.com wrote: We're an educational institution in two senses: we write educational material forv the world in general, and we educate each other. I strongly suggest you start a Wikimedia-related blog and crosspost posts like this to it, not just leave them in a mailing list archive that isn't even in Google. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Building a community or building an encyclopedia?
On 17 October 2010 06:22, David Goodman dgoodma...@gmail.com wrote: We're an educational institution in two senses: we write educational material forv the world in general, and we educate each other. I strongly suggest you start a Wikimedia-related blog and crosspost posts like this to it, not just leave them in a mailing list archive that isn't even in Google. - d. Yeh, it was good, worth archiving and continuing to discuss. Fred ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Building a community or building an encyclopedia?
On 15/10/2010 22:36, MuZemike wrote: snip That comes to my question regarding whether or not we are here to build an online community or an online encyclopedia. Should we focus outwards toward the reading/viewing audience, or should we focus inwards towards the editors? It was settled early on that we are writing an encyclopedia. Before I started editing. What has happened since then? Well, we have had some divas on the site who have thought that we should focus on things that are basically all about them rather than the encyclopedia. And this has been a strategy partially successful in its own terms. But fundamentally I don't think such people have won the argument, however much harder they may have made it to see the community as primarily a working environment. That's what it remains, a highly interactive place in which to do voluntary work on an encyclopedia. Charles ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Building a community or building an encyclopedia?
On 15/10/2010 22:36, MuZemike wrote: snip That comes to my question regarding whether or not we are here to build an online community or an online encyclopedia. Should we focus outwards toward the reading/viewing audience, or should we focus inwards towards the editors? on 10/16/10 9:01 AM, Charles Matthews at charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote: It was settled early on that we are writing an encyclopedia. Before I started editing. What has happened since then? Well, we have had some divas on the site who have thought that we should focus on things that are basically all about them rather than the encyclopedia. And this has been a strategy partially successful in its own terms. But fundamentally I don't think such people have won the argument, however much harder they may have made it to see the community as primarily a working environment. That's what it remains, a highly interactive place in which to do voluntary work on an encyclopedia. No, Charles, an environment alone does not build an encyclopedia; or, for that matter, any other group project. There are two elements involved: the effort required to work on the substance and goals of the project, and an equal effort to build and maintain the group, yes, the community of persons collaborating to achieve the goals of the project. Marc Riddell ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Building a community or building an encyclopedia?
On 16/10/2010 15:23, Marc Riddell wrote: On 15/10/2010 22:36, MuZemike wrote: snip That comes to my question regarding whether or not we are here to build an online community or an online encyclopedia. Should we focus outwards toward the reading/viewing audience, or should we focus inwards towards the editors? on 10/16/10 9:01 AM, Charles Matthews at charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote: It was settled early on that we are writing an encyclopedia. Before I started editing. What has happened since then? Well, we have had some divas on the site who have thought that we should focus on things that are basically all about them rather than the encyclopedia. And this has been a strategy partially successful in its own terms. But fundamentally I don't think such people have won the argument, however much harder they may have made it to see the community as primarily a working environment. That's what it remains, a highly interactive place in which to do voluntary work on an encyclopedia. No, Charles, an environment alone does not build an encyclopedia; or, for that matter, any other group project. There are two elements involved: the effort required to work on the substance and goals of the project, and an equal effort to build and maintain the group, yes, the community of persons collaborating to achieve the goals of the project. Think what you like. The actual membership of the group has changed much more than the pages on which matters are discussed, as places to exchange views and information. You also are misreading what I said. Where do I imply alone? Charles ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Building a community or building an encyclopedia?
More than maintaining the articles,and more than maintaining the group, the focus should be on maintain the continual and increasing development of new editors and new articles--not just as content creators, but as gnomes, and techies, and admins. The excitement of working here has not just been on our wide influence, but of _developing_ something that will have wide influence, and of developing it in a way which will be self- perpetuating. Many people and many groups have written encyclopedia, but very few have done as we have, developed a new way of creating them, and other material also. This is not a finite project., and will remain a matter not just of replacement , but of further grown. Based on other human institutions, we are not likely to even attain a finished form or a finite bod of knowledge.I think that should be seen here also as what our goal should be. I don't want as much to continue what I do in Wikipedia , as to have others continue it , while I learn new things to do, and find people who will do things that I've not even dreamed of being capable of. If i have a choice between rescuing articles, or rescuing even one editor, It's the editor who matters--in the hope that they will write many articles and in their turn encourage yet more editors. We're an educational institution in two senses: we write educational material forv the world in general, and we educate each other. On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Charles Matthews charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote: On 16/10/2010 15:23, Marc Riddell wrote: On 15/10/2010 22:36, MuZemike wrote: snip That comes to my question regarding whether or not we are here to build an online community or an online encyclopedia. Should we focus outwards toward the reading/viewing audience, or should we focus inwards towards the editors? on 10/16/10 9:01 AM, Charles Matthews at charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote: It was settled early on that we are writing an encyclopedia. Before I started editing. What has happened since then? Well, we have had some divas on the site who have thought that we should focus on things that are basically all about them rather than the encyclopedia. And this has been a strategy partially successful in its own terms. But fundamentally I don't think such people have won the argument, however much harder they may have made it to see the community as primarily a working environment. That's what it remains, a highly interactive place in which to do voluntary work on an encyclopedia. No, Charles, an environment alone does not build an encyclopedia; or, for that matter, any other group project. There are two elements involved: the effort required to work on the substance and goals of the project, and an equal effort to build and maintain the group, yes, the community of persons collaborating to achieve the goals of the project. Think what you like. The actual membership of the group has changed much more than the pages on which matters are discussed, as places to exchange views and information. You also are misreading what I said. Where do I imply alone? Charles ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l -- David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[WikiEN-l] Building a community or building an encyclopedia?
I get this feeling sometimes that some people are more interested in building a community on Wikipedia rather than helping to construct an encyclopedia. I tend to think that there is a notion which existed upon Wikipedia's founding: Always leave something undone. Whenever you write a page, never finish it. Always leave something obvious to do: an uncompleted sentence, a question in the text (with a not-too-obscure answer someone can supply), wikied links that are of interest, requests for help from specific other Wikipedians, the beginning of a provocative argument that someone simply must fill in, etc. The purpose of this rule is to encourage others to keep working on the wiki. I say this is not readily followed anymore, and I personally disagree with that tenet, because of the sheer volume of the English Wikipedia (almost 3.5 million articles) that will always have some sort of positive article creation rate due to developing and new events that occur worldwide all the time. Anyways, I think the reason why we had something like that in there is so that we could preserve or expand this community of editors. However, that implies that a certain level of drama should always exist, not to mention that perfection is near-impossible to achieve (though I'm sure many of us strive to do the best we can to improve the encyclopedia), and that one's interpretation of an article or topic being complete varies. That comes to my question regarding whether or not we are here to build an online community or an online encyclopedia. Should we focus outwards toward the reading/viewing audience, or should we focus inwards towards the editors? -MuZemike ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Building a community or building an encyclopedia?
Focus on the task is the work involved. It is only with great difficulty that a group can develop the skill necessary to deal successfully with the dynamics inherent in group work and get something done. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilfred_Bion#Basic_assumptions and his book Experiences in Groups. Fred I get this feeling sometimes that some people are more interested in building a community on Wikipedia rather than helping to construct an encyclopedia. I tend to think that there is a notion which existed upon Wikipedia's founding: Always leave something undone. Whenever you write a page, never finish it. Always leave something obvious to do: an uncompleted sentence, a question in the text (with a not-too-obscure answer someone can supply), wikied links that are of interest, requests for help from specific other Wikipedians, the beginning of a provocative argument that someone simply must fill in, etc. The purpose of this rule is to encourage others to keep working on the wiki. I say this is not readily followed anymore, and I personally disagree with that tenet, because of the sheer volume of the English Wikipedia (almost 3.5 million articles) that will always have some sort of positive article creation rate due to developing and new events that occur worldwide all the time. Anyways, I think the reason why we had something like that in there is so that we could preserve or expand this community of editors. However, that implies that a certain level of drama should always exist, not to mention that perfection is near-impossible to achieve (though I'm sure many of us strive to do the best we can to improve the encyclopedia), and that one's interpretation of an article or topic being complete varies. That comes to my question regarding whether or not we are here to build an online community or an online encyclopedia. Should we focus outwards toward the reading/viewing audience, or should we focus inwards towards the editors? -MuZemike ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
