1. Wikipedia in the spotlight

2. Why study Wikipedia? As a first step into understanding communities that depend on user contributions… – All have novel intellectual property licensing. – Exciting, but easy to be confused. – Many open source project cannot be appreciated without examining a complex code base. – In contrast, Wikipedia is accessible. Thus, it offers first step into developing an understanding…

3. Wikipedia in 2009

4. We examine the organization in summer of 2009 Sue Gardner, director: “It is time for us to grow up a little bit.” – Top ten web site. – Mass market media coverage. – What needs to grow up, if anything? Game plan: How does it work? – Myths, fact and misunderstandings. – What issues do they need to consider?

5. Myths, facts and misunderstandings

6. History Founded by Jimmy “Jimbo” Wales in 2001. – What happened to Nupedia? – What happened after adapting Wiki format? Not for profit Wikimedia Foundation started in 2003. – How many paid employees in 2006? Started scaling up in 2007. How? – Location. Administration. Fund raising. – What else?

7. What is a Wiki? What does Wiki mean? – Why for this use? How the software works. – Restrictions on participation. – Editing. – History pages. – Recent changes. – Search functions. What/who is a Wikipedian?

8. Norms for Wikipedia start with Linus’ Law What Linus Torvald said: – “Given a large enough beta-test and code- developer base, almost every problem will be characterized quickly and the fix obvious to someone.” Eric Raymond coined a popular rendition… – “Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow.” Ever since… – Competing interpretations about what this aphorism means….

9. A sample of Eric Raymond Perhaps this just goes to show … – Every social movement needs someone pithy to find a popular phrase that resonates with the broader goals of the movement…

10. Two interpretations of Linus’ law… ideas or investment? Accumulating ideas (about building s/w): – What is the best way to accumulate ideas about how to create a new piece of software? – Sampling ideas from a wide base. “Reduce the role of the single software expert.” Spread it around. Accumulating investment (which does not deteriorate due to wear & tear): – What is the best way to accumulate the investments in pieces of code that make up a new piece of software? – Gathering investments from a wide base. “Reduce the role of command from above.” Make room for variety of ideas.

11. Norms among Wikipedians Shared norms: A shared belief in Linus’ law. Neutral point of view. NPOV. Verifiability. Not original research. How does it work?

12. Why does this work? How to encourage good behavior? – Wikipedians committed effort. – Wiki etiquette. Good faith. Civility. Discussion. Dispute resolution. – Consensus & monitoring. Automated notice for contributors. Encouraging use of citations. – What else? Why is this needed?

13. Virtuous cycle Virtuous cycle is self-reinforcing… – More users  more eyes  more extensions  more adoption and users  more extensions…. – A form of network effect: Whole grows into greater than sum of any contribution… Fostering the virtuous cycle. – Personal satisfaction. Friendship and teamwork, Moving to new projects. – What else? Self-reinforcing with Google….

14. Summary: Jimbo Wales’ key insight Make site accommodate both insiders & tourists and the virtuous cycle keeps growing. – Need one type of code for those who do a lot. Make their roles easier to perform. Need different type of code for a large group who makes occasional contribution. – Might get best of both worlds? Why? Inherently difficult to get right. – A club involving personalities from early/late majority & early adopter/innovator. They must get along. What else? Astonishing success raised question: can this combination be imitated?

15. What issues do they need to consider?

16. Should they worry about contrasts with traditional encyclopedia? Sources for authoritative text. – “Self-selected” editors & contributors instead of experts. – Guarding against junk science. Topic selection. – Who assigns responsibility? Consensus as arbiter? Framing passages. – Editors enforce consistency. Forming the index for the whole. Tone and presentation. – One expert author v. contributions from all corners. – Emphasis on surprises, quirks, novelties, populism. What else?

17. Which controversies should they worry about? Scope of coverage. Does it matter? – Celebrities. Historical and fictional figures. Geek priorities. Factual correctness. – Unchecked facts in historical biographies. – What is truthiness when code is not tested? – Who is responsible/accountable for error/defamation? – Use in court proceedings? A neutral point of view for everything? – Religious figures. Controversial people. Politicians. – Depicting horrific historical events. Editorial discretion. – Personal vindictiveness by editors. – What are the limits? What else?

18. Wikipedia and Steven Colbert

19. Should they alter the site in order to nurture growth? Open versus clean. – Inviting new entry. Training new contributors in wiki ettiquite – Vanity entries. Destructive vandals. – When it is not done it can be wrong. Who is responsible? – When authorities get interested (e.g., Chinese censorship, Argentine dirty war, Congressional staff). How far to extend the wiki concept? – Over 100 languages. – Wikiquotes, wiktionary, wikibooks, wikispecies, etc. Supporting the broad community – Conferences. On line governance

20. Continuing expansion Expansion of range of Wikipedia – Wapedia for mobile devices, – Wikiquotes… – Wikispecies…. – Placeopedia for mashups for location information for articles, – Wikirage (what’s hot), – Wikiscanner (sniffing out self-interested anonymous edits) – Wikipedia selection for schools (SOS charity)… – What else? Limits?

21. What needs to grow up? – Professional staff. – Funding. Fund raising. – Monitoring. – Governance. – Transparency. – What else?

22. Managerial cool down

23. Broad lessons? Somebody w/a clear focus… – Jimbo Wales at Wikipedia… Compelling motive for repeat & occasional participation. – Motives often not commercial. – Blending programmer culture, on- line web culture. Lightning in a bottle. What could be captured and replicated? – In a commercial context?