Difference between revisions of "Wikipedia and Encyclopedic Production"
(Int.links) |
(+ Infobox work) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
+ | {{Infobox work | ||
+ | | title = Wikipedia and Encyclopedic Production | ||
+ | | date = 2013 | ||
+ | | authors = [[Jeff Loveland]]<br />[[Joseph Reagle]] | ||
+ | | doi = 10.1177/1461444812470428 | ||
+ | | link = http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1461444812470428 | ||
+ | }} | ||
'''Wikipedia and Encyclopedic Production''' - scientific work related to [[Wikipedia quality]] published in 2013, written by [[Jeff Loveland]] and [[Joseph Reagle]]. | '''Wikipedia and Encyclopedic Production''' - scientific work related to [[Wikipedia quality]] published in 2013, written by [[Jeff Loveland]] and [[Joseph Reagle]]. | ||
== Overview == | == Overview == | ||
Wikipedia is often presented within a foreshortened or idealized history of encyclopedia-making. Here authors challenge this viewpoint by contextualizing [[Wikipedia]] and its modes of production on a broad temporal scale. Drawing on examples from Roman antiquity onward, but focusing on the years since 1700, authors identify three forms of encyclopedic production: compulsive collection, stigmergic accumulation, and corporate production. While each could be characterized as a discrete period, authors point out the existence of significant overlaps in time as well as with the production of Wikipedia today. Authors analysis explores the relation of editors, their collaborators, and their modes of composition with respect to changing notions of authorship and originality. Ultimately, authors hope contribution will help scholars avoid ahistorical claims about Wikipedia, identify historical cases germane to the social scientist’s concerns, and show that contemporary questions about Wikipedia have a lifespan exceeding the past decade. | Wikipedia is often presented within a foreshortened or idealized history of encyclopedia-making. Here authors challenge this viewpoint by contextualizing [[Wikipedia]] and its modes of production on a broad temporal scale. Drawing on examples from Roman antiquity onward, but focusing on the years since 1700, authors identify three forms of encyclopedic production: compulsive collection, stigmergic accumulation, and corporate production. While each could be characterized as a discrete period, authors point out the existence of significant overlaps in time as well as with the production of Wikipedia today. Authors analysis explores the relation of editors, their collaborators, and their modes of composition with respect to changing notions of authorship and originality. Ultimately, authors hope contribution will help scholars avoid ahistorical claims about Wikipedia, identify historical cases germane to the social scientist’s concerns, and show that contemporary questions about Wikipedia have a lifespan exceeding the past decade. |
Revision as of 09:24, 4 June 2019
Authors | Jeff Loveland Joseph Reagle |
---|---|
Publication date | 2013 |
DOI | 10.1177/1461444812470428 |
Links | Original |
Wikipedia and Encyclopedic Production - scientific work related to Wikipedia quality published in 2013, written by Jeff Loveland and Joseph Reagle.
Overview
Wikipedia is often presented within a foreshortened or idealized history of encyclopedia-making. Here authors challenge this viewpoint by contextualizing Wikipedia and its modes of production on a broad temporal scale. Drawing on examples from Roman antiquity onward, but focusing on the years since 1700, authors identify three forms of encyclopedic production: compulsive collection, stigmergic accumulation, and corporate production. While each could be characterized as a discrete period, authors point out the existence of significant overlaps in time as well as with the production of Wikipedia today. Authors analysis explores the relation of editors, their collaborators, and their modes of composition with respect to changing notions of authorship and originality. Ultimately, authors hope contribution will help scholars avoid ahistorical claims about Wikipedia, identify historical cases germane to the social scientist’s concerns, and show that contemporary questions about Wikipedia have a lifespan exceeding the past decade.