Wikipedia heeft vandaag een totaal van 500.000 artikelen in 50 verschillende talen gepubliceerd, schrijft Kuro5hin. Met meer dan 300.000 artikelen alleen al in de laatste 12 maanden maakt dit het tot de grootste en snelst groeiende open encyclopedie op internet.
WEBSITE ONTWERP •
KENNIS DELEN •
De Wikipedia is een mooi project. Ik heb er zelf ook al aan meegeschreven. Wat ik me nou afvroeg, hoe valt er vast te stellen dat iets de 'grootste' op internet is. Zijn daar ook sites voor?
2004-02-27, door Michiel
over het verschijnsel Wiki. Men kon eerst niet geloven dat het zou werken, en natuurlijk heeft iedereen achteraf gelijk.
Net als Yhprum's Law (Murphy spelled backwards): Het kan niet, maar het werkt wel.
2004-03-03, door inne ten Have
Nog een leerzaam artikel
over de kracht van Wiki's als bottom-up tool: "The only way you can write something that survives is that someone who's your diametrical opposite can agree with it," says Jimmy Wales, a founder of Wikipedia.
2004-03-09, door Inne ten Have
1 Aprilgrap van Metafilter: Metafilter-wiki
Clay Shirky schrijft over de belevenissen
van Matt Haughey, oprichter van Metafilter, toen hij op 1 april Metafilter veranderde in een wiki. Iedereen was geschokt, maar de gedragsregels ontstonden vanzelf na een nacht van chaos.
2004-04-06, door Inne ten Have
Een interview met Ward Cunningam
. Onder andere over het bijstellen van de software om de culturele waarden en normen te versterken:
Every wiki develops a set of norms. Every member of the community sets themselves against those norms. If you have people who post stuff that is waaaay beyond those norms, such as posting pornographic
images in pages, then you find that kind of thing gets dealt with
very quickly. It just gets removed.
But since last Fall we have had an individual who has been posted
only slightly outside those norms, so close to what’s acceptable that others have been unable to agree on whether or not his contributions should remain...
2004-04-22, door Inne ten Have
Most people, when they first hear about the fact that anyone can edit a wiki immediately come up with all the reasons why it can't work.
However, there are a number of large scale implementations that prove that assertion is false. The biggest, of course, is Wikipedia, and Salon has an article discussing how they deal with the occasional vandals. They treat the wiki process a bit different, and will block and ban certain users if they fail a "three strike" policy. Still, it's yet another example of a successful large scale bottom-up project, which established companies keep telling us are impossible.
Gevonden op Techdirt
2004-04-27, door Inne ten Have
Wikipedia as Participatory Journalism: Reliable Sources?
naar een PDF-file (304kb)
This study has provided a method for benchmarking the reputation of articles based solely on metadata, without requiring interpretation of article content. Though simple, this method of using information on edits and authors is immediately applicable to any of the 50 odd active language Wikipedia editions. The results indicate that there is a linkage between Wikipedia as a “working draft of history” and current news events. A great many Internet users will visit Wikipedia and contribute to it on their own volition, but the study points to clear cases where the citation in the press has driven traffic directly to articles and has improved them as a result.
Open content projects such as Wikipedia received their inspiration from the earlier open source software community that emerged from online collaboration for developing software. Linus Torvalds, leader of the Linux open source movement once said,“Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow.” He was referring to software development, but it is equally relevant to Wikipedia.
This use of more “eyeballs” is a rather unique feature of participatory journalism, as it benefits directly from more traffic and more users making their impression by scrutinizing or contributing to content. This tight feedback loop between reading and editing provides for very quick evolution of encyclopedic knowledge, providing a function that has been missing in the traditional media ecology.
2004-06-02, door Inne ten Have
Wikipedia Founder Jimmy Wales Responds
Wikipedia is an excellent project, and Slashdot readers' questions for Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales were just as excellent -- as are Jimmy Wales' answers to 12 of the highest-moderated questions you submitted.
2004-07-30, door Inne ten Have
Wikipedia Reputation and the Wemedia Project
The core issue of collaborative editing, that of accuracy and trust, has reached a point in debate where research is needed to advance the practice of content use and development. Hiawatha Bray of the Boston Globle offered a Wikipedia criticism in July, calling it One great source — if you can trust it...
Geschreven door Ross Mayfield op Many 2 Many.
2004-08-30, door Inne ten Have
Een half jaar later al een miljoen
Wikipedia Reaches One Million Articles
September 20, 2004 (Tampa, Florida): The Wikimedia Foundation announced today the creation of the one millionth article in Wikipedia, its project to create a free, open-content, online encyclopedia (Wikipedia.org ). Started in January 2001, Wikipedia is currently both the world's largest encyclopedia and its fastest-growing, with articles under active development in over 100 languages. Nearly 2,500 new articles are added to Wikipedia each day, along with ten times that number of updates to existing articles.
Wikipedia now ranks as one of the ten most popular reference sites on the Internet, according to Alexa.com . It is increasingly used as a resource by students, journalists, and anyone who needs a starting point for research. Wikipedia's rate of growth has continued to increase in recent months, and at its current pace Wikipedia will double in size again by next spring.
With its dedicated community of volunteers, Wikipedia has also gained recognition as a website for community interaction. This has led to two international prizes in 2004, the Prix Ars Electronica for "Digital Communities" and a Webby Award for "Best Community".
In addition, static versions of Wikipedia are being prepared for release on CD or DVD. Soon to be available are a German language version distributed by Directmedia Publishing, and a bilingual French and English version, included as part of an upcoming Mandrakesoft Linux distribution.
2004-09-20, door Inne ten Have
A Case of Mutual Aid: Wikipedia, Politeness, and Perspective Taking
The anarchist Peter Kropotkin once wrote that “Mutual aid is as much a law of animal life as mutual struggle” (1902). At the time, he was responding to arguments arising from Darwin's The Origin of Species: that in nature and society individual creatures ceaselessly struggle against each other for dominance. Kropotkin took pains to explain and provide examples of how animals and humans survive by cooperating with each other. Interestingly, Kropotkin also contributed the article on anarchism to the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica, a collaborative product of the Scottish Enlightenment and a precursor to the Wikipedia, a collaborative, on-line, and free encyclopedia.
This paper explores the character of “mutual aid” and interdependent decision making within the Wikipedia. I provide a brief introduction to Wikipedia, the key terms associated with group decision making, and the Wikipedia dispute resolution process. I then focus on the cultural norms within Wikipedia that frame participation as a cooperative endeavor. I conclude by identifying some notions from negotiation literature that may be inappropriate or require adaptation to the Wikipedia case.
2005-02-11, door Inne ten Have
Interview met Jimmy Wales
Jimmy Wales is the founder of Wikipedia.org and director of the
Wikimedia Foundation. I've admired his work for years.
Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia
whose entries are written by a worldwide community of users.
Constantly adding and refining entries, this community has created
an encyclopedia that rivals any other ever written.
Q - What's one aspect of Wikipedia that excites you?
The Wikipedia community. Our big-picture vision is to share
knowledge with all of humanity. That was the original dream of the
Internet before the era of pop-ups and spam, and it's now being
realized. It's exciting. We're learning huge lessons about
harnessing community, treating communities well, and seeing the
Q - How does Wikipedia stack up to Britannica?
By number of entries, we're about six times as large, but that's an
unfair comparison, since we slice up entries differently. The
fairest comparison is by number of words, and we're twice the size
of Britannica by that count.
An interesting comparison, not to Britannica but to other top sites,
is traffic. We now have more traffic than Paypal, more than
USAToday.com, and we're close to NYTimes.com. We're doing this all
with volunteers who are managing the servers and doing everything
themselves, and that's pretty astonishing.
I was recently on a panel with the head of USAToday.com. He said
they have 300 million pageviews a month. I said that's good; we have
400 million. Then he said he had 180 people on staff. I said I have
one part-time person who helps me with the servers. There's
something new going on here. It's not about broadcast, it's about
Q - What about Wikipedia's error correction? It needs to be good,
since any user out there can make a change to any page on the site.
My answer to that criticism is that the average quality of entries
is high, but any given page could be broken at any moment. IBM did
some research on Wikipedia, and it found that for certain types of
vandalism, the median time to correction is under five minutes.
That's for the typical type of change, when someone blanks out a
page or puts in a curse word.
Q - Five minutes is pretty quick for such a huge site. How is that
A lot of people, when they learn about Wikipedia, have this very
attractive idea that it's an emergent phenomenon - the sort of thing
where a million people add one sentence each to build the site.
But really, the vast majority of changes on Wikipedia are made from
a hard-core group of users. It's not a Darwinian phenomenon of
millions of people, but rather a community of people. That core
group is in constant communication, via IRC, and on the Web itself -
they're always talking, in 40 languages, about the articles. That's
how the site gets corrected so fast. People notice the change and
very quickly communicate it through the community. The tight-knit
group of users makes all the difference.
Q - How does one join that tight-knit group?
Hopefully it's not too closed to participation. You get on the wiki
and start editing, and people start noticing. People can also come
to IRC. That's a hurdle for newcomers, since you have to download a
chat client. There's also a mailing list. We try to be friendly and
welcoming, like good neighbors, in terms of getting people involved.
Q - Do you have any plans to sell Wikipedia or make money from it?
Not Wikipedia. I do have Wikicities, a for-profit venture, on the
side. But I'm pretty firm about the big-picture mission about
Wikipedia: it's a free encyclopedia for every person on the planet.
That's what drives my entire life. I have enough money that I don't
need money. I mean, I have a Ferrari. OK, now what? Let's do
something cool. It's more cool to think about totally changing the
landscape - for example, by radically undercutting the market for
Q - Textbooks?
On Wikibooks, there's a growing community of people working on
textbooks: a complete K through 12 curriculum, and on through
university level, for all subjects. It's just getting started, and
it's a long-term project. But how cool is that?
Q - VERY cool.
Gekregen via de nieuwsbrief van Good Experience
2005-03-10, door Inne ten Have
Another great speaker at the Doors of Perception conference was Jimmy Wales from Wikipedia. All you worldchanging readers are familiar with it, but if anyone doubts its success at making the sum of all human knowledge freely available, consider that Wikipedia has more entries than the Encyclopedia Britannica and Encarta combined (almost double Encyc. Britannica), and that's just in English. In all languages, they expect to reach a terabyte of information in another year. Obviously that's still not ALL human knowledge, but better than any one other source. And what about success in terms of popularity? They only get about 20% fewer hits than the New York Times, and expect to exceed it by next year. And yet, it's an all-volunteer organization. Questions of the encyclopedia's quality are more subjective, but hey, if you think an entry is bad, you can change it.
So how has Wikipedia become a success where other open-source knowledge bases (and proprietary knowledge-bases within companies) fail?
According to Wales, it's not primarily a technological innovation, but a social & design innovation. Its elements:
- 100% free software and content: everyone has the freedom to copy, modify, redistribute, and redistribute modified versions of it and its content.
- Neutrality as bedrock principle (skirting philosophical issue of Objective Truth, just getting people to agree that what's written tells a fair story).
- Software design which reflects needs of users and has good quality-control features.
- Security not through user access permissions, but through vigilant users who clean stuff up after vandalism, and easy ways to see when things have been changed.
- No set structure of governance--consensus, democracy, aristocracy by reputation, and occasionally a monarchy of Jim are all used to decide issues or settle disputes. They are flexible about the process, because they care more about the results than the process.
Gevonden bij WorldChanging.com
2005-03-25, door Inne ten Have
Consumerpedia has no built in category hierarchy, but rather uses a unique user-driven hierarchical tagging system. This lets users create and define the relationships between different topics, helping others easily discover and browse related information (this is similar to that mythical college campus that was initially built without sidewalks so that they could later be properly placed over the dirt paths created by actual foot traffic patterns).
- Consumerpedia is the consumer information resource everyone can help build.
- Each topic has it's own page where anyone and everyone can create a new topic or add comments and navigational suggestions to existing topics.
- Other users then rate how helpful those comments and suggestions are and the most helpful ones rise to the top.
The Consumerpedia system is designed so that it evolves based upon how actual users wish to use it, with the sole organizing principle being how helpful it is to others.
How it started
Consumerpedia came out of a desire to have a user-driven consumer resource that evolved based on how people actually used it - where they were not forced into certain narrow categories and topics as an appendage of someone's ecommerce effort, but rather a completely independent information resource that was an end in itself - one that had no conflict of interest and with the sole goal of simply making it easier to find and share helpful information - so we built it. Please note that Consumerpedia is still very much in early beta testing, so any and all feedback and suggestions to help further build, refine, and improve Consumerpedia are sincerely encouraged and greatly appreciated. Thanks!
2005-03-29, door Inne ten Have
Bijna exact 2 jaar later: 1.000.000
How and Why Wikipedia Works: An Interview with Angela Beesley, Elisabeth Bauer, and Kizu Naoko
This article presents an interview with Angela Beesley, Elisabeth Bauer, and Kizu Naoko. All three are leading Wikipedia practitioners in the English, German, and Japanese Wikipedias and related projects. The interview focuses on how Wikipedia works and why these three practitioners believe it will keep working. The interview was conducted via email in preparation of WikiSym 2006, the 2006 International Symposium on Wikis, with the goal of furthering Wikipedia research. Interviewer was Dirk Riehle, the chair of WikiSym 2006. An online version of the article provides simplified access to URLs.
- PURPOSE AND GOAL
- QUALITY ASSURANCE
- GROWTH CHALLENGES
- WIKIPEDIA RESEARCH
2006-07-10, door Inne ten Have
I first met Jimbo Wales, the face of Wikipedia, when he came to speak at Stanford. Wales told us about Wikipedia's history, technology, and culture, but one thing he said stands out. "The idea that a lot of people have of Wikipedia," he noted, "is that it's some emergent phenomenon -- the wisdom of mobs, swarm intelligence, that sort of thing -- thousands and thousands of individual users each adding a little bit of content and out of this emerges a coherent body of work."† But, he insisted, the truth was rather different: Wikipedia was actually written by "a community ... a dedicated group of a few hundred volunteers" where "I know all of them and they all know each other". Really, "it's much like any traditional organization."
The difference, of course, is crucial. Not just for the public, who wants to know how a grand thing like Wikipedia actually gets written, but also for Wales, who wants to know how to run the site. "For me this is really important, because I spend a lot of time listening to those four or five hundred and if ... those people were just a bunch of people talking ... maybe I can just safely ignore them when setting policy" and instead worry about "the million people writing a sentence each".
So did the Gang of 500 actually write Wikipedia? Wales decided to run a simple study to find out: he counted who made the most edits to the site. "I expected to find something like an 80-20 rule: 80% of the work being done by 20% of the users, just because that seems to come up a lot. But it's actually much, much tighter than that: it turns out over 50% of all the edits are done by just .7% of the users ... 524 people. ... And in fact the most active 2%, which is 1400 people, have done 73.4% of all the edits." The remaining 25% of edits, he said, were from "people who [are] contributing ... a minor change of a fact or a minor spelling fix ... or something like that."
2006-09-04, door Inne ten Have
Quickiwiki, Swiki, Twiki, Zwiki and the Plone Wars Wiki as a personal information manager and Collaborative Content Tool
This article looks chiefly at completely free (both personal and commercial use allowed) or shareware open source products. An excellent starting point, and one Ward calls canonical, for wiki clone software is at WikiWikiWeb WikiEngines. If you wish to delve deeper into the philosophical and metaphysical realms of wikidom, go to these pages on Ward's WikiWikiWeb:
Built around object-oriented programming, wikis are extremely popular within the software development community, especially among those that practice the principles of Extreme Programming.
Gepubliceerd op Information today
2006-11-24, door Inne ten Have
This article endeavours to denote and promote pedagogical experimentations concerning a Free/Open technology called a "Wiki". An intensely simple, accessible and collaborative hypertext tool Wiki software challenges and complexifies traditional notions of - as well as access to - authorship, editing, and publishing. Usurping official authorizing practices in the public domain poses fundamental - if not radical - questions for both academic theory and pedagogical practice.
The particular pedagogical challenge is one of control: wikis work most effectively when students can assert meaningful autonomy over the process. This involves not just adjusting the technical configuration and delivery; it involves challenging the social norms and practices of the course as well (Lamb, 2004). Enacting such horizontal knowledge assemblages in higher education practices could evoke a return towards and an instance upon the making of impossible public goods” (Ciffolilli, 2003).
, Full text
Gevonden bij Profetic
, Dossiers technopédagogiques
2007-05-01, door Inne ten Have
Over the last couple years we’ve watched Wikipedia go from a virtually unknown website to one of the top 10 in the world - so it’s no secret that Wiki’s have seen an unprecedented amount of growth and popularity (not to mention free Wiki engines such as MediaWiki or MoinMoin feeding that growth).
I took the liberty to scour the web for as many Wiki’s as I could find, meanwhile compiling a list of each. Some of my findings were great, such as: WikiTravel, Heroes Wiki, and WoW Wiki (for all you WoW fanatics), and some, well, not so great.
I noticed a growing amount of businesses adopting the concept. Wiki’s aren’t only a helpful resource for customers, but a great way for marketers to obtain that all-too-important customer feedback, which is why it’s great that more businesses are beginning to understand the true value of Wikiing (wikiing?) :).
Anyway, on with the good stuff. Here’s a list of over fifty Wiki’s by rank. If there’s something I’ve missed, post a comment and I’ll be happy to add it. Enjoy...
Gepubliceerd op AD Volcano blog
2007-05-08, door Inne ten Have
Geef zelf commentaar