The Wikipedia Revolution: How a Bunch of Nobodies Created the World's Greatest Encyclopedia

A core idea Wikipedia embraced, borrowed from the original MeatballWiki, was to assume good faith (AGF) when interacting with others. The guidelined promoted optimistic production rather than pessimistic nay-saying, and reds, "unless there is strong evidence to the contrary, assume that people who work on the project are trying to help it, not hurt... See more

The website may be free of advertisements, but that hasn't stopped entities from trying to exercise influence. Spammers, public relations companies, and those who can gain from crafting a public perception have turned their sights to Wikipedia. Thomas Friedman noted in his book: "it is not an accident that IBM today has a senior staffer who polices... See more

For many wikipedians, the act of participating in article making is also an act of learning. This is a dynamic most outside readers don't often see or experience. Writing about subjects while abiding by Wikipedia's neutral point of view requires research, critical thinking, and weighing the facts. Contributors often find themselves learning by edit... See more

Eventualism has become an accepted norm in the community, because by default since the beginning of the project, starting from nothing, articles have overwhelmingly benefited from multiple eyeballs (and edits).

...it was decided early on that there could be only one version of each article presented at any single time. Participants had to work toward a single common article entry. Differng parallel versions of an articple would serve no one well - it would simply be too easy for factions to go off their own biased corners.

Wikipedia survives and retains its passionate community also becuase it is social. You never know whom you will meet, strike up a conversation with, and as a consequence, learn from. Every Wikipedia article has a discussion page, to encourage debate and the exchange of ideas with others in the community. Imagine taking an online bulletin board, dis... See more

Since the Web 2.0 era is about user-generated content, it can be a show to newcomers who are not used to the idea when they come to Wikipedia. The community practice of not waiting for a fancy solution and just getting your hands dirty has spawned a special mantra (or admonishment): SOFIXIT.

The lack of top down editorial oversight resulted in uneven development of Wikipedia's articles, oftentimes with stark examples: The biography of Britney Spears takes up nearly twice the space as the one for Socrates.

Larry Sanger said: "wikis don't work if people aren't bold" Wikipedia says: "be bold in editing, moving, and modifying articles, because the joy of editing is that, although it should aim for, perfection is not required. And do not worry about messing up. All prior versions of articles are kept, so there is no way that you can accidentally damage W... See more

Being free has unexpected advantages. Wikipedia has evolves from being a no-cost alternative into being a superior resource in its own right. Over the years, it has become deeper, broader, and more up-to-date than its traditional rivals. Because of its mission to stay free, it encourages participation-volunteers choose to donate their time and effo... See more