Re: [Wiki-research-l] Does wikipedians feel like commoners ?

[Todd Allen]

If you're looking for general history on the digital commons movement,
check out Richard Stallman and the Free Software Foundation, and Eric S.
Raymond's *The Cathedral and the Bazaar*. A lot of the initial Wikipedians
were very much in favor of open source and open content, and were quite
familiar with those. I don't, to be quite honest, know about "E. Ostrom",
and have never heard them discussed on-wiki, but of course other editors
might be.

But if you really want to see the influence of the "commons" idea on
Wikipedia, the open source software movement is going to be very relevant
to what you want to look at. Mediawiki, the software that Wikipedia and
other Wikimedia sites run on, is open source, and the technology stack
underlying it is as well.

On Sat, Dec 7, 2019 at 9:05 AM Sebastien Shulz 
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm currently doing a Ph.d on digital commons. I'm tracing the history of
> the "digital common" movement (if there is one). And I wanted to know if
> there are some studies about Wikipedians and their relation with the
> conceptual framework of the commons (do they feel like commoners ? Do they
> know E. Ostrom, etc.)
> Thanks a lot for your help !
> Best regards,
>
> *Sébastien Shulz*
> *Doctorant en sociologie *
> *Laboratoire Interdisciplinaire Sciences Innovations Sociétés*
> *06.68.86.68.46 // Linkedin *
> ___
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>
___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Re: [Wiki-research-l] New paper - Indigenous knowledge on Wikipedia

[Todd Allen]

I found one error:

"Even the idea that contributions to the wiki should be signed by
individuals is at odds with many traditional societies where knowledge
expression is mainly collective, not individualised..."

That's already how it works. Only discussion posts and the like are signed.
I don't know of any language Wikipedia in which contributions to the actual
encyclopedia articles are signed, and I know several of the largest
(German, Spanish, and English) do not have such a practice. (If there is a
project where individual contributions are signed, please let me know, I'd
be interested to see how they make that work. What if it gets edited?)

Aside from that, the article seems to state that such a project is
incompatible with both NPOV and copyleft, so I'm not sure that Wikimedia
hosting it would be the best fit as those are fundamental requirements.
(That's not to say it's not worth doing at all, of course.)

Todd

On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 5:52 PM Nathalie Casemajor 
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> For those of you who are interested in "small" Wikipedias and Indigenous
> languages, here's a new academic paper co-signed by yours truly.
>
> Published in an open access journal :)
>
> Nathalie Casemajor (Seeris)
>
> -
>
> *Openness, Inclusion and Self-Affirmation: Indigenous knowledge in Open
> Knowledge Projects
> <
> http://peerproduction.net/editsuite/issues/issue-13-open/peer-reviewed-papers/openness-inclusion-and-self-affirmation/?fbclid=IwAR3YQA3eXXZ7Z3ou6lz38_zxXsU_XZ0fu8AJVHE5EVGDil0SBa2U2q0gCKc
> >*
>
> This paper is based on an action research project (Greenwood and Levin,
> 1998) conducted in 2016-2017 in partnership with the Atikamekw Nehirowisiw
> Nation and Wikimedia Canada. Built into the educational curriculum of a
> secondary school on the Manawan reserve, the project led to the launch of a
> Wikipedia encyclopaedia in the Atikamekw Nehirowisiw language. We discuss
> the results of the project by examining the challenges and opportunities
> raised in the collaborative process of creating Wikimedia content in the
> Atikamekw Nehirowisiw language. What are the conditions of inclusion of
> Indigenous and traditional knowledge in open projects? What are the
> cultural and political dimensions of empowerment in this relationship
> between openness and inclusion? How do the processes of inclusion and
> negotiation of openness affect Indigenous skills and worlding processes?
> Drawing from media studies, indigenous studies and science and technology
> studies, we adopt an ecological perspective (Star, 2010) to analyse the
> complex relationships and interactions between knowledge practices,
> ecosystems and infrastructures. The material presented in this paper is the
> result of the group of participants’ collective reflection digested by one
> Atikamekw Nehirowisiw and two settlers. Each co-writer then brings his/her
> own expertise and speaks from what he or she knows and has been trained
> for.
>
> Casemajor N., Gentelet K., Coocoo C. (2019), « Openness, Inclusion and
> Self-Affirmation: Indigenous knowledge in Open Knowledge Projects »,
> *Journal
> of Peer Production*, no13, pp. 1-20.
>
>
> More info about the Atikamekw Wikipetcia project and the involvement
> of Wikimedia Canada:
>
> https://ca.wikimedia.org/…/Atikamekw_knowledge,_culture_and…
> <
> https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Atikamekw_knowledge,_culture_and_language_in_Wikimedia_projects?fbclid=IwAR1PynlNUrZcRSIIu9WwcKhp0QjE_UqPz2O8_KNZxnsrTGQYKoLyOMuvh10
> >
> ___
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>
___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Research on Edit Size

[Todd Allen]

Not only that, but we'd also have to exclude reverts. If someone replaces
an article with "LULZ I HAX WIKI", and I revert that, the software will see
me as "adding" all the text that was previously there, but of course I
didn't in any reasonable sense actually do that.

Todd

On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 9:38 AM WereSpielChequers <
werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Haifeng Zhang,
>
> If I were you, looking at this, I'd watch out for templates. Templates
> particularly substituted ones involve a lot of bytes that someone hasn't
> typed. I recently did an edit that involved me typing {{subst|Infobox
> academic}} you might be surprised how many bytes that generated. And how
> many more key depressions that edit involved compared to my typical edit.
> Similarly reversion can involve adding a lot of bytes, but on further
> inspection you might simple be reverting a vandal who removed four
> paragraphs of text that others had contributed.
>
> You might also want to look at an editors edit rate per hour, and time
> since their previous edit. If their previous edit was half an hour earlier
> they might have been making a cup of tea, cutting the grass or taking a
> phone call, or they might have spent half an hour on that edit. But if they
> have made forty edits in that previous half hour then you are pretty safe
> to assume that those edits on average represent less than a minute of work.
>
> As well as what Kerry said, there are two things you might want to take
> into consideration. Firstly those of us with experience of breaking news
> stories quickly learn the hard way to save little and often, especially on
> a topical subject. Take for example the article on Sarah Palin in the hours
> after she was announced as John McCain's running mate. My memory was of
> multiple concurrent edit wars and a tidal wave of vandalism, I went back
> later and measured it as peaking at 25 edits per minute, I don't think we
> even log the edits lost to edit conflicts, but in practice anyone clicking
> the edit button at the top was going to get an edit conflict - your only
> chance of getting an edit to save would have been to edit by section.
>
> Secondly, over time editors pick up tools, some of which  make a big
> difference to edit rates. Edit summaries are a good indicator of this,
> watch for words such as Twinkle, Hotcat, Huggle and AWB.  I haven't used
> Catalot on Wikipedia, but it is the reason why my edit count is higher on
> Wikimedia commons, despite my spending rather more time on Wikipedia.
>
> Regards
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 22:44, Haifeng Zhang 
> wrote:
>
> > Dear folks,
> >
> > Are there studies that have examined what might affect edit size (e.g., #
> > of words add/delete/modify in each revision). I am especially interested
> in
> > the impact of editor's tenure/experience.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Haifeng Zhang
> > ___
> > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> >
> ___
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>
___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l