Janitors of knowledge: constructing knowledge in the everyday life of Wikipedia editors

Abstract

Purpose The aim of this article is to explore how trustworthy knowledge claims in Wikipedia are constructed by focusing on the everyday practices of Wikipedia editors. The article focuses particularly on the role of references to external sources for the stabilisation of knowledge in Wikipedia.Design/methodology/approach The study is inspired by online ethnography. It includes eleven Wikipedia editors, together with the sociotechnical resources in Wikipedia. The material was collected through interviews, online observations, web documents and discussions, and e-mail questions. The analysis was carried out from a perspective of science and technology studies (STS).Findings Wikipedia can be regarded as a laboratory for knowledge construction in which the already published is being recycled. The references to external sources anchor the participatory encyclopaedia in the ecology of established media and attribute trust to the knowledge published. The policy on Verifiability is analysed as an obligatory passage point to which all actors have to adjust. Active Wikipedia editors can be seen as akin to janitors of knowledge, as they are the ones who, through their hands-on activities, keep Wikipedia stable. Originality/valueThe study develops an innovative understanding of the knowledge construction culture in one of the most popular sources for information on the internet. By highlighting the ways in which trust is established in Wikipedia, a more reflexive use of the participatory encyclopaedia is made possible. This is of value for information literacy training.

Theoretical foundations for information literacy: A plan for action

“…Google, Facebook, or Wikipedia , actually shape our understanding of what constitutes important knowledge and thus learning (cf. Sundin 2011;Sundin & Haider 2013). With such an understanding, information literacy must also relate to notions of medium and materiality.…”

On Author, Copyright and Originality: Does the Unified EU Originality Standard Correspond to the Digital Reality in Wikipedia?

“…Lastly, the rule, arguably, does not exclude non--minor contributions which might be now almost or completely re-written by someone else and therefore not present in the article anymoresomething that would only fall under copyright protection only if joint authorship criteria would be satisfied. 56 All of this gives the impression that "Wikipedian" is a more inclusive concept than copyright "author", at least when it comes to one aspect of authorship, namely, attribution. The article will now follow to examine and compare other aspects of authorship already identified in the CJEU judgements: 1) author's relationship with the work, 2) author's relationship with society, and 3) presumptions about author's creative process including her personal qualities.…”

Dimensions of Credibility: Review as a Documentary Practice

“…An example, mirroring web credibility guidelines addressed to students, is the concern that sources should have been formally assessed, which is expressed in Wikipedia's policies on Verifiability and No original research (Wikipedia, 2013a;2013b; see also Sundin, 2011). In comments to posts in one of the climate change blogs analyzed, factors having to do with a document's author and production history (Wilson, 1983) were also prominent.…”