[Air-l] Studying Wikipedia, studying humans?

[Joseph Reagle]

On Wednesday 15 February 2006 11:07, Jeremy Hunsinger wrote:
> I was reading over some wikipedia policies and related things this  
> morning and once again the perennial question arose... at what point  
> is studying wikipedia... studying humans?  

I make this very point in my study of its culture:

http://reagle.org/joseph/blog/career/phd/s05?showcomments=yes
    * Arguments Among Friends: the Wikipedia - a snapshot of the sharp
       point (sans literature review) of my proposal:

     The Wikipedia is not merely an online encyclopedia; while the Web
     site is useful, popular, and permits anyone to contribute, the site
     is only the most visible artifact of an active community. Unlike
     previous reference works which stand on library shelves distanced
     from the institutions, people, and discussions from which they
     arose, the Wikipedia is a community, and the encyclopedia is a
     snapshot of its continuing conversation.

If you look at the development of dictionaries and reference works (most 
prominently dictionaries) one realizes the key to their character is the 
policies that governed their development (e.g.,  Philip Gove of Webster's 
Third). The novelty of Wikipedia is that one can easily see the discourse 
and work that gives rise to the artifact.