Re: [Wikimedia-l] Global Wikipedia: International and cross-cultural issues in online collaboration
this sounds interesting - but what are the conditions of this book and articles written? will there be available for free? rupert. On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Everton Zanella Alvarenga ezalvare...@wikimedia.org wrote: (Sorry for the cross-posting, but today is Saturday.) *Important dates:* Proposals Submission Due: January 31, 2013 Full Chapters Due: March 15, 2013 Final Submission Due: July 1, 2013 *Editors (to whom chapters should be sent and questions addressed): Pnina Fichman (fichman at indiana.edu mailto:fichman at indiana.edu); Noriko Hara (nhara at indiana.edu mailto:nhara at indiana.edu) Indiana University, Bloomington. *Introduction:* Wikipedia offers articles in 285 languages and more than 80% of Wikipedia articles are written in languages other than English. In addition, the English Wikipedia itself attracts users from all over the world. This global nature of Wikipedia provides a rich socio-technical environment to examine a wide range of international and cross-cultural issues. Despite the global reach of Wikipedia, most of the published works about Wikipedia are based on the English site. More research should pay attention to the global, multilingual nature of Wikipedia to gain a better understanding of online international cooperation, on one hand, and of cross-cultural variations in mass knowledge production processes and outcomes, on the other. The purpose of this book is to explore a wide range of international and cross-cultural issues as they are manifested on Wikipedia. We are particularly interested in research that takes a socio-technical perspective on the global Wikipedia and integrates social theory to explain online interactions. For example, we invite studies on online global collaboration, coordination, and conflict management in this rich socio-technical environment. We hope that these works will highlight implications for other socio-technical environments or extend the use and development of social theory. This unique publication aims to be a collection of international and cross-cultural research on the Wikipedia.We expect that this edited volume will appeal to academic researchers, graduate, and undergraduate students interested in Wikipedia and, more broadly, in social studies of information and communication technologies, as well as to Wikipedia contributors. *Recommended topics*: We are seeking chapters that include both empirical and conceptual work and soliciting innovative analysis of international and cross-cultural aspects of Wikipedia to be part of this book. Appropriate topics for chapters include (but are not limited to) the following list: ·Case studies of Wikipedia in one of the 285 languages, with special interest in small and medium size Wikipedias; for example, focusing on policies, processes, interactions or information quality ·Conflict and collaboration in editing international entries on any particular language of Wikipedia ·International and cross-cultural collaboration; for example, international cooperation in fighting vandalism ·Intercultural synergy across boundaries on Wikipedia or Wikimedia projects ·Cross-cultural studies that compare more than one Wikipedia, for example, focusing on: ·Cross-cultural comparisons of content, structures, and contributions ·Comparative studies of policies, interactions, and processes ·Efforts to understand similarities and differences across Wikipedia in multiple languages in user motivations, establishment and maintenance of local communities and challenges ·Comparative analysis of editing policies around the globe ·Information quality across two or more Wikipedia languages ·Comparison of scope and representation of topics across Wikipedia in several languages ·Vandalism and trolling behaviors across national and language boundaries Chapters are expected to have between 4000 and 5000 words (excluding references, figures, and tables). Only original work whose copyright is owned (or cleared) by the chapter authors and not considered for publication elsewhere can be considered for inclusion. *Important dates*: *January 31, 2013: submit 2-3 page chapter proposals and authors’ bios (200 words) *Feb 1, 2013: receive acceptance notification *March 15, 2013:*submit first full chapters *May 15, 2013: receive reviewers’ comments *July 1, 2013: submit final versions This book is scheduled to be published by Scarecrow Press. For additional information, please visit https://rowman.com/Scarecrow. Scarecrow Press is the publisher of, among other titles, /Digital Media/: /Technological and Social Challenges of the Interactive World/ (2011). The publication is anticipated to be released in 2014. ** EASA Media Anthropology Network http://www.media-anthropology.net For further information please contact: Dr. John Postill RMIT University, Melbourne jrpost...@gmail.com To
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Global Wikipedia: International and cross-cultural issues in online collaboration
2013/1/20 rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com this sounds interesting - but what are the conditions of this book and articles written? will there be available for free? I too have the same question. Will it be available in CC-BY-SA license like Wikipedia critical point of viewhttp://networkcultures.org/wpmu/cpov/ ? Thanks Arjuna ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Global Wikipedia: International and cross-cultural issues in online collaboration
what i was able to find now is mostly behind paywalls: * http://norikohara.org/Publications.html one article about a similar topic than the book is online though: * http://eprints.rclis.org/15529/#.T5b6gY4qhNc rupert. On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Arjuna Rao Chavala arjunar...@gmail.com wrote: 2013/1/20 rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com this sounds interesting - but what are the conditions of this book and articles written? will there be available for free? I too have the same question. Will it be available in CC-BY-SA license like Wikipedia critical point of viewhttp://networkcultures.org/wpmu/cpov/ ? Thanks Arjuna ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quarterly reviews of high priority WMF initiatives
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi folks, to increase accountability and create more opportunities for course corrections and resourcing adjustments as necessary, Sue's asked me and Howie Fung to set up a quarterly project evaluation process, starting with our highest priority initiatives. These are, according to Sue's narrowing focus recommendations which were approved by the Board [1]: - Visual Editor - Mobile (mobile contributions + Wikipedia Zero) - Editor Engagement (also known as the E2 and E3 teams) - Funds Dissemination Committe and expanded grant-making capacity I'm proposing the following initial schedule: January: - Editor Engagement Experiments February: - Visual Editor - Mobile (Contribs + Zero) March: - Editor Engagement Features (Echo, Flow projects) - Funds Dissemination Committee We’ll try doing this on the same day or adjacent to the monthly metrics meetings [2], since the team(s) will give a presentation on their recent progress, which will help set some context that would otherwise need to be covered in the quarterly review itself. This will also create open opportunities for feedback and questions. My goal is to do this in a manner where even though the quarterly review meetings themselves are internal, the outcomes are captured as meeting minutes and shared publicly, which is why I'm starting this discussion on a public list as well. I've created a wiki page here which we can use to discuss the concept further: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings/Quarterly_reviews The internal review will, at minimum, include: Sue Gardner myself Howie Fung Team members and relevant director(s) Designated minute-taker So for example, for Visual Editor, the review team would be the Visual Editor / Parsoid teams, Sue, me, Howie, Terry, and a minute-taker. I imagine the structure of the review roughly as follows, with a duration of about 2 1/2 hours divided into 25-30 minute blocks: - Brief team intro and recap of team's activities through the quarter, compared with goals - Drill into goals and targets: Did we achieve what we said we would? - Review of challenges, blockers and successes - Discussion of proposed changes (e.g. resourcing, targets) and other action items - Buffer time, debriefing Once again, the primary purpose of these reviews is to create improved structures for internal accountability, escalation points in cases where serious changes are necessary, and transparency to the world. In addition to these priority initiatives, my recommendation would be to conduct quarterly reviews for any activity that requires more than a set amount of resources (people/dollars). These additional reviews may however be conducted in a more lightweight manner and internally to the departments. We’re slowly getting into that habit in engineering. As we pilot this process, the format of the high priority reviews can help inform and support reviews across the organization. Feedback and questions are appreciated. All best, Erik [1] https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Vote:Narrowing_Focus [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings -- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation Support Free Knowledge: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l Following up on this... The Editor Engagement Experiments team had the first one of these with Erik and Sue last Tuesday (the 15th). Tilman was there to take notes, and I published our slide deck, so there is a transcript and PDF to review for those interested at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings/Quarterly_reviews/Editor_engagement_experiments Erik will likely share some notes soon on how he and Sue want to rejigger the meeting structure based on this first try. Overall it was helpful for all parties, but obviously in a meeting this long and covering this kind of material, adjustments can and should be made. Steven ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Editor retention (was Re: Big data benefits and limitations (relevance: WMF editor engagement, fundraising, and HR practices))
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 09:53:46AM +, Richard Farmbrough wrote: number of years ago the oligarchy destroyed hope (Esperanza) - now the Well, Esperanza ended up ossified faster than the rest of wikipedia, so it had to be taken down. I'm worried about people saying the same thing won't happen to us or Esperanza is behind us now. This is blatantly not true. Just look at the state of en.wikipedia! We're going to have to do a lot of work to get things koving again :-/ sincerely, Kim Bruning ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
