Opportunities and risks of the largest online encyclopadia of all time
Wikipedia growth and growth. But how and where? Encyclopadia online in the free, published by layers such as experts (start May 2001) are between 9 and 10 million. Article, alone in the English version already supposedly 2.386.723 Article (Stand in early May 2008) appeared. Alone the Babylonian, often heavily fluctuating numbers confuse. This is any other knowledge medium, whether online or cuttered, far off. English could mean the idea for an international, global intelligence company, not only leading angelsiaqsian countries (such as Great Britain, Ireland, USA and Australia), but a global communication beyond the Commonwealth. Or through only a new digi imperialism of knowledge?
The German-speaking version currently includes (early May 2008) 750.345 items. Thereafter, French, Polish, Japanese, Italian and Dutch Follow in the range of Current 659 369 to 438.Contribute 608. After all, 19 languages already have more than 100.000 article on. In total, Wikipedia united 250 languages. For this you have to scroll down the so often-aligned main page. So there is also 8483 contributions in Kolsch / Riparisch, 1.579 in Boarisch (Bairic), 233 in Tibetan, 50 in Bugiansian, 17 in Cheyenne. Klingon is currently not a active community and is only geared to the media enterprise world.
Wikipedia history is a history of success of a freely produced and freely usable, rather liberal as a closely edited source of knowledge, an electronically at any time revision and updated general knowledge, whose single capacity is increasingly increasing in smaller language communities. The work of the French Encyclopadists as authors, editors and opinion performed in a political, scientific and technological explanation fell into the heater phase in front of the revolution and was thus closely linked to the fight against any type of ignorance and tyranny. If you take care, you see the tremendous progress of argumentative and conceptual energy, as an exemption in factual-technical detail and in the social and political liveliness and sharp discourse.
If you want so, you can make this discourse confidence world-run, intellectual and urban, because the private, the specialist and the public use of reason in all areas of knowledge and cultural life forms accepts the form of a revolutionary expandable expensable at any time. The previous lexika and words of words, rather and tolerated by coarse and small fursten and rulers, are still encapsulated in the spirit of a specific rationalism, which is still the appearance, the declaration itself could be made territorial under control and the planer is a brave Bustle.
The plant of the French enzyclopadia is therefore a prime example of the transition from the scholarly understood to practical, ethical and political reason, as it was in shape of the overwind of old feudal standards and the first democratization attempts of the complex absolutist mechanism in France.
The opposite Wikipedia currently seems to find itself in the obvious phase of its own application. If you want something like Wikipedia is a kind of matrix, or the all-like basic verse of a gentle airship supplied and screwed together from all sides, without the tendering gas mixture with which the Zeppelinhulle is inflated, is already completely preconceived: the currently largely Anytime updatable lexicon in progress, a processing of old enzyclopadia, but also an open process to break up old content and put in new connections with earlier not (so fast) developed facts.
The need for active, critically managed and circumscribing reading
The crucial question is: is the impressive statistical progression of Wikipedia also a cultural revolution or at least her harbinger? Or is she part of the information enslavement and knowledge leveling in the age of general data explosion?
Overall, contributions to all potential knowledge areas are ready, with the user-friendliness in detail, in cross-reference and in the possible overview in the English portal to be high. Nevertheless, such impressions are added with caution. A coral reef can not be accessed on a clear shape or statement. German access reminds here and there to old circumstances of a printed lexicon.
But the navigation comfort of such a giant project is not a simple finished product. The Wikipedia world has to do it with a work in Progress, and with substantial information, related knowledge, or also with argumentative points of view and dimensions, and therefore differs from the chic smooth of the Internet advertising.
In view of Wikipedia, Wikipedia has a technical and visual aspect, is a matter of content, but also the possibility of comparing the different languages and the occasional perspectives, which occasionally.
- For example, for example, if individual information is lacked in articles in terms of it or can be easily accessed by keywords (Lemma / Lemmata) in countless lists.
- It will be unauthorized if important individual aspects of (more complex) topics are scattered over many individual items or in remote headings and savings must be re-sought.
The articles are the latest WiKinews and the functioning functions: Wikiquot (significant quotes), Wikibooks (teaching and professional bookers), Wikisource (Original works) and Wikiversity (as a learning platform) and the conventional media collection Wikimedia Commons.
Once this architecture has been ared, it becomes clear that Wikipedia works for the individual user in conjunction with a powerful PC on multiple levels, or work. In addition to the rigid frame of a lexicon with its alphabetically fixed contributions, Wikipedia offers the option of an interactive library with sufficient number of relevant articles and corresponding links to a topic.
This is called:
- Texts and media can be changed by voice change in the left column (capped in the TV menu) and so point for point comparatively,
- or you can be placed side by side on the desk as "virtual lot sheet collections" (multiple selection or text and image copy of your own PC) and compare it to each other.
In this way, quickly listed or complex information and comparisons, which are not only on the level of a language, on the floor and the history of a particular country and not solely from the perspective of individual editors and authors, but in invisible authors Reader-collective and moving in polyglots of different languages, regions and cultures.
Between retrospective lexicon and progressive encyclopadia
It has been a lot about manipulability and counterfeitability, yes have been reported on almost prophetic criminal trap as an entry at Wikipedia. But the central point is indeed:
- Wikipedia is the idea for a book-former, finished printed lexicon, but a dynamic encyclopadia in Progress, where every reader is already a reader already critical-comparative researcher and co-author. The reading process at Wikipedia and over them must be critically balanced. This active-critical, and circumscribed reading differs from the consumerization of the Web 2.0, the gearful information and the good old bourgeoic book culture of the 19. Century equally.
- Wikipedia is a final bastion before the relentless suction of the global present, which will also melt the past knowledge from all hemispharies with all the consequences in the forge of a freely updated newspoint and future planning.
Wikipedia thus ware a two-ambiguous instrument: the source of comparability of fast info knowledge, but also its complete leveling.
Here, above all, I’m the priority of a more concentrated and yet between text and hypertext working posture on the PC, which can certainly come close to the comparative scientific research and reaffirming from different print sources. However, this type of reacture is a behavior that consistently transform only a small number of users to a given topic.
But this means that the short search or a keyword and the pitching of a suitable article, for example, in the German Wikipedia is only a very engraved way of information recovery from this encyclopadia. I call this attitude the routine consumption, the passive acceptance of the given knowledge with the risk of digital half, quarter and eighth education.
A broader, controlled and reflected acquisition of information takes place if you use the versions and additional functions offered in the international Wikipedia language network. Wikipedia thus contains the idea for the option to gain domestic and innovative information and perspectives in important topics in every language group. And thus to step in the circle of a reading and thinker experience, which is originally in the intense confrontation with a longest argumentative text or discursive book. If you can at least German, English and French, will at least be able to convince a stucco far from it.
If you talk about more languages, especially as a remote cultivation, the better. But the idea of multi-perspectance and polyglot (multilingualism) contradicts the monopolistic book claim of the old imperial lexicon model: the airship Wikipedia had a truly explosive mixture in the multiple view of things. On the other hand, the project threatens in the book-forming standardization of the facts or in the technical copy-and-paste variant of death in a content-empty matrix in uniform control.
Uniform and strange samples
What does this mean with millions of articles? Here are some small samples:
- For the keywords "Paris", "Berlin" or "London" you will meet a comfortable global uniformity: exempt, informative and possible updated articles in series construction, from speech to speech typical, only slightly converted chapters, which are on a comparable version , parallel, but independently worked or simply reversed and changed in parts . They offer examples of global locations, with their typical mix of standardization and occasionally individual history. These articles can also be the transshipment locations for the further headings and text forms in Wikipedia: property information and practical tips for travelers are linked to numerous keywords with other articles, in further detailing (persons, events, monuments) or in college (economic, social, cultural development) linked.
- The difference between the Spanish and the Catalan representation of Metropolen Madrid and Barcelona shows: The scarce long of the Catalan article to Madrid also contains a clear political commentary.
- While the topic "Auschwitz" is dealt with in detail and intensively in French, the German article is almost scarce. The French catch binds the geographical and technocratic information on the three places Auschwitz I, II and III (administrative complex, extermination and labor camp) to further knowledge and adventure circles: the close cooperation of German politics and economics, the exact storage history, the Knowledge and non-action of the Allies, a link list of familiarities among the victims.
- In the German version, the saving of the basic information on "Auschwitz" is hardly through the link "Staatliche Museum Auschwitz-Birkenau" and other competitive. While the French and English executions give the process of extermination a vivid political physiognomy between industrial abstraction and mass-wise personal suffering, Auschwitz remains a relatively contourless object in the German article.
- The articles on the Nazi functionaries are natural in German, English, French, often, often colored baroque with Nazi portrays as with Trophaen and in the content relatively complex. In Franzosisch is a link to Hitler’s "my fight" equal to a link to the full-length text "Mon Combat".
- To be positively too positively, the Upperbaire short articles acts on the driver, and as it sounds like a grotesque parody to Chaplin’s hynkel-German from the "gross dictator" like a grotesque parody of Chaplin’s hynkel-German:
Hitler is in the first night WWEN World Wriage Soldier Gwen and Håt afterwards in Da NSDAP career. On the 8th. November 1923 Håt A Vasuacht, in Bavaria to peep. Because Hitler-Pusch is aba vo da Boarische Police Niedagschlagn Worn. In custody in Landsberg am Lech Håt he then "My fight" Gschriem. From 1929/30 Håt de Nsdap Imma Mehra election elimination in Didschland Kristied and 1933 he is suspicious Kanzler Worn. Under the Hitler Ham de Nationalsozialists built in German Reich a dictatorship. She Ham de opposition parties Vabotn and political opponent and minority Wia de Judn Vafolt and converted. Then Ham`s Noo the Zwoaten Worldkriag Oozetselt. Desweng San in EiroPa estimated 30-35 million Leem Kemma Kemma, because Drunta Alloa Six Milliona Judn. Germany and Europe warn in a wide range of destruction. Since Hitler Selba Håt Si on 30. April 1945 in Seim Bunka in Berlin’s Lem Gnumma.
The more detailed Latddsch article sounds like a politically back and forth troodling Ohnsorg theater, but is characterized by more distance and joke:
Dat Weer Dat Eerste Mol, Dat Anner Ludde Un Ok He Sums Spitz Rimen, Dat He Wat Beter Konn, As de Annern. Dat Warrt Singer, Drexler Harr Glieks to Harrer Ment: "Do Hot OA Goschn, knows Ma!"(Up Platt:" De Hett en Muul, which Knets Wi Bruken!"). Still An’n Sulby Avend Supply Drexler, Hitler in De Party to Get. Hitler Hett Later Jummer Silk, He Weer The Sevente Liddmaat Vun de Party Ween.
On philosophical-political parquet falls Z.B. The French-speaking articles on "Liberte", whereby the memorial-systematic development of the individual, philosophical and metaphysical dimension and the socially-political development of the term even the pretty consuming German articles, during the English language sketch to "Freedom (Philosophy)" and "Freedom (Political)" in their current leakedness urgently needed a revision, even if they are supplemented by the concept of "Liberty". However, it is not sufficiently clear that the difference between "Freedom" and "Liberty" lies that individual and social freedoms are guaranteed or securitized as "Liberty’s" legally, constitutional or human and burger, and thus also from the legally guaranteed waiver of the state or other institutions arise without intervening massively in the influence sphare of individuals, groups and social benefits.
System-related distortions and transcendentalism
With the idea and social reality of freedom and freedom, Wikipedia, of course, also strips a brisant topic that affects the project directly self. And the question is whether this topic can be easily wikipediatic or beyond such an experiment. Either Wikipedia remains a seemingly value-neutral lexicization and historization or positive knowledge, or is also on the position of certain cultural-philosophical articles associated with the idea of explaining and revolutionary power of encyclopadists, and faviating at the level of factual-argumentative conviction Mabstobe of a worldwide reason, which must not have arrived in the so-called wealth world for a long time.
Especially in the important Freedom of Speech, who has received a new global encyclopadic dimension with the Internet and also with Wikipedia as a transnational lexicon, the following note is introduced:
The examples and perspective in this article or Section may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. Please Improve This Article Or Discuss The IE on the Talk Page.
And who now clicks "Worldwide View" comes to "Wikipedia: Wikiproject Countering Systemic Bias", ie a project, in which one senses on counterstation and compensation for "system-related favorite or discrimination".
In the English-speaking Wikipedia, several Wiki projects were founded, which could counteract the avoidable "distortions" as far as possible, which may be caused by cultural, religious, sexual or other "overrepress stations" of employees within the Wikipedia community. Instead of an explicit securities discussion, you try it with a defensive damage limit.
A suggestion for countermeasure
Here are questions about questions: How do you want to deal with the system-related distortion by overrepresentation? By elimination? By producing ever further disposable variants? Or by visible waiver, by changing in the matter, through open, but also structured exchange and reasoning? By deleting and exposing representations, contributing and votes? Due to one-sided starting so far underprinted against? Or through clearer, advanced discourse forms of the Internet, in which the changes in articles, topics and explosive knowledge areas, so social innovation and individual education itself becomes discussed, which is discussed whether an object of knowledge is now a normal state or paradigm of one represents new epoch? In question, the functional role is once again the functional role, the self-mortal of the medium: Wikipedia – only a publicly online lexicon of old imperial historicism and factual positivism, or even a set building causes currently flattened digital knowledge chocolates or a new, innovation-staked form between fact, opinion and argumentation While a Bertelsmann Print Edition is survived, but has not found itself for a long time?
Maybe Wikipedia should be at least minimal qualifying for its own, so previously quantitative progress and distinguishes sharp between lexical historization and digital update. Thus she became an encyclopadic momentum and sharp win. The Wikipedians were able to write a critical online historization and short comment in many important articles and topics, according to the model:
- "Over the topic x or. Keyword X are currently available (2008 plus n) the following items. In the period 2008-2001 (Ruckwarts), the articles A1 were written in the language L1. The focus was on S1 to SN. In the language L2 to Ln, the focus of the corresponding articles were identical / analog / different / contrabist (copies. Parallel, variants, contrasts). From 2008 (Z.B.) There was a new (basic) point of view for the topic X, so that Article Series B1 to BN in the L1 (and more in languages L2 to LN) revealed."
- This form of retrospective lexicization as well as easier multilingual linking with important keywords should be given from the current occasion of today’s weighting.
- The lexicalization leads to a data storage of certain up to date content-valued formats and thus to a comprehensible online historization.
- She was from the approach of today fast and hot media newspaper, TV and internet, which have to operate a highly topical, but also very provisional, but also very provisional.
- The complete collection of the old, no longer changed articles and the presentation of the new contributions in the river was clearly made clear the span between old and new (general) knowledge as a truly useful knowledge area instead of the UP. To lose knowledge.