User:Keara KB/My Wikipedia Experience

Wikipedia consist of 4,655,994 content articles and 34,335,028 pages total, yet its functionality can be compared to that of a simple index card. Computer programmer Ward Cunningham  noticed how the cards were good for “knowledge management” and  provided a “useful way for people to talk about their processes and requirements." Cunningham began carrying these notecards to meetings and after spreading them out on the table, they allowed "information sharing between participants regardless of their status within the organization." Wikipedia can be traced back to Paul Otlet’s Universal Repertory and H.G. Wells’ Proposal for a World Brain in the beginning of the 20th century. Joseph Reagle described Wikipedia as "the most visible artifact of an active community" that thrives off of good faith collaborative culture. Good faith collaborative culture depends on the elements of assuming the best of others, demonstrating patience, civility, and humor. In this essay I will analyze my Wikipedia experience, supported by concepts from the Online Communities course and Kraut and Resnick’s design claims.

A Culture of Collaboration
The most important part of my Wikipedia was learning about Wikipedia as a community of collaboration. Wikipedia is a recursive public, or a public that is constituted by a shared concern for maintaining the means of association through which they came together as a public. The "means of association" that binds Wikipedia together is the pursuit of knowledge. An emphasis is placed on sharing knowledge instead of hoarding it. This emphasis on collaboration contrasted sharply with the concept of the winner-take-all society. A winner-take-all society depends on the efforts of only a small number of top performers where the main motive is to get ahead or outperform others. Winner-take-all societies create a phenomenon in which only a handful of individuals have the chance of being successful, whereas Wikipedia is designed so that even beginning Wikipedians can create articles and benefit from the community.

Social Breaching
Essentially, I was conducting a social breaching experiment similar to that of Garfinkel’s “lodger experiment." Harold Garfinkel, a sociologist, instructed his students to go home to their families over winter break and act as lodgers in their own homes. This earned mixed reactions from their families, who found the student’s behavior to be unrecognizable. In order to complete the Wikipedia assignment, I had to assume a different identity as a Wikipedian.  I ended up unintentionally breaking many Wikipedia norms, such as citing documents or linking pages together, because these norms were different than the ones that govern my everyday life. Like the lodgers, it was difficult for me to separate myself from my familiar environment. Also, throughout my entire academic career, I have been told by professors not to use Wikipedia as a source because it is “not credible.” In order to do this assignment, I had to violate this norm that was ingrained in my mind, and this constitutes as social breaching.

Initiation
While not as serious as initiation into the military or a fraternity, Wikipedia has some requirements before one becomes a member. For example, my classmates and I had to complete the online student orientation in which we were taught how to create an account, make a sandbox, etc. The orientation guaranteed my commitment because after completing half an hour of the training, I was not going to go back and quit my Wikipedia endeavor.

Encouraging Contribution
As a newcomer, I was comforted by Wikipedia’s Please do not bite the newcomers policy which asks more experienced Wikipedians to “assume good faith” when assessing the articles of newcomers, and to “carefully explain their rationale for the reversion so as not to deter a potential contributor.” Because I received comments that acknowledged the value of my contribution instead of scolding me for my mistakes, I felt confident enough to keep contributing. I was also motivated by the performance feedback left in the form of edits by experienced members.

Norms
Consistent with Cialdani’s focus theory, I realized that I learned the norms of Wikipedia through salient behaviors, or “actions that stand out and point out to people what is appropriate to do in a situation.” For example, on my Wikipedia page, I used the word Hispanic in my discussion of minority firefighters. I would never have known this was considered “biased” language unless I looked at a suggestion made on my revision history page by another Wikipedian, who suggested I use the term “Latino” instead. The revision history function serves as a “visible trace that normative behavior occurred.” As stated in Kraut and Resnick, publicly highlighting inappropriate behavior and suggesting a descriptive norm, or appropriate behavior, increased my adherence to this norm. Also, preserving this feedback from other members on the revision history page “increases member’s knowledge of community priorities and compliance with them.” However, I did not appreciate the way our class was classified as students in front of the Wikipedia community. Yes, we are enrolled in this class, but I was concerned that this would cause us to be targeted by more experienced Wikipedians. This would create a phenomenon similar to Godwin's law, which described the tendency of online participants to think the worst of each other. When a seasoned Wikipedian reads my page, I do not want them thinking "look at that, another annoying newbie."

Lack of Socialization
The aspect that bothered me the most was the lack of socialization that I encountered during my Wikipedia experience. The phrase “dove right in” best describes my foray into Wikipedia, as I had no prior experience with it and did not take the time to “scope things out” before becoming a member. In other words, when I noticed the lack of socialization between experienced Wikipedians and myself, I definitely did not have the confidence to seek them out myself to initiate an interaction. Socialization is a critical issue when it comes to dealing with newcomers. I suggest for Wikipedia to establish a committee (loosely modeled off of their “Welcome Committee") of experienced Wikipedians who volunteer to mentor new members. This will give new members the confidence they need when it comes to making risks and establishing themselves within the Wikipedia community. By not adequately socializing newcomers, Wikipedia is missing out on the power of social contact. Social contact is one of the four types of motivation and is a powerful motivator associated with positive moods. Previous online communities have shown success in combining tedious tasks with social interaction.

Wiki Love
I did not participate in the Wiki love assignment because after learning about the different theories of motivation, I do not believe in holding rewards in front of people’s faces. I believe in creating a circle of virtue through gratitude as opposed to a circle of indebtedness through rewards. To this end, I decided to thank a Wikipedian who left tips and a suggested revision for my page.

Reflection and Conclusion
In the end, I still did not feel like a Wikipedian. However, because my project required such extensive research in the archives, I can now sympathize with historians! Perhaps this is because I identified more with being part of the class as opposed to the complex and academic community of Wikipedia. I also thing my experience would have differed if I was more intrinsically motivated as opposed to just doing it to receive a grade for a class. I feel as if I did not really get a chance to develop my skills, and I mostly stuck to a "trial by error" approach due to my inexperience with Wikipedia. However, my experience led to some important insights as to the design of and participation in an online community. I am proud to say that I ended my Wikipedia experience feeling empowered that I have the ability to cultivate knowledge through the portal of Wikipedia.