I like you idea about "vulgarization". This word implies a negative connotation however, as if you are referring to Wikipedia articles collectively as the wastebasket of rejected academic journal articles. I would really like to come up with a positive sounding term for this, because only through easily accessible and easy-to-read articles will the Wikipedia mission be viable worldwide. I think machine translation is already here in some sense through the widespread use of Google translate, and I agree with you that epistemology has a crucial role in the new politics and within personal and collective identities.
I think however, that WIkipedia has brought more to the table than the three things you mention: hyper-textual tools, a crowd-sourced editorial process and an open intellectual property. Wikipedia's blackouts show that as a political entity it is becoming a force to be reckoned with. 2013/5/28, Joe Corneli <holtzerman...@gmail.com>: > http://pierrelevyblog.com/2013/05/27/an-epistemological-critique-of-wikipedia/ > - favorable review > http://pierrelevyblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/stevejankowski_thesis_v18.pdf > - PDF (199 pages) > > _______________________________________________ > 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
