Why do people volunteer to edit Wikipedia?

Wikipedia IconSome economists have long been a bit puzzled at the astounding success of Wikipedia. Standard economic theory wouldn’t predict that such a project would thrive without some form of remuneration for the participants.

There are other projects based on peer production that seem to fit economic theory better. For instance, contributors to open source software who are seeking jobs in the computer industry can list their contributions on their resume. But what, if anything, do people get back when they contribute time to Wikipedia?

Since I regularly encourage skeptics to contribute to Wikipedia, either on their own or through organized projects like Guerrilla Skepticism, the answer to this has interested me. Understanding motivations that work would help us understand how to motivate others.

Recently some researchers at Sciences Po, Harvard Law School, and University of Strasbourg created a series of experiments to get to the heart of this problem. What they found is pretty interesting.

Read more of this post

A silly BuzzFeed list teaches a lesson on Wikipedia vandalism

Wikipedia logoI try not to encourage the link-bait over at BuzzFeed (even just for fun) but one “listicle” posted last Thursday got lots of attention among the UK people I follow. It is titled “12 Spectacular Acts Of Wikipedia Vandalism” and I have to admit it contains some pretty funny stuff.  The list includes Ernest Hemingway as the author of a children’s book and the First Law of Thermodynamics reinterpreted through Fight Club.

People love to point out weird things that make it into Wikipedia. When it’s not being played for humor (as it is here) often the purpose is to call into question Wikipedia’s accuracy. But one thing that these posts often leave out – how long does vandalism like this hang around on Wikipedia? Some articles are constantly being edited, and if a piece of vandalism is removed immediately, how much damage can it do?

So just for fun, I decided to seek out each of the pieces of vandalism that BuzzFeed highlighted and find out.  Just how likely were you to stumble on one of these pieces of vandalism unaware?

Read more of this post

The right way and the wrong way to file skeptic complaints

Complaint Department grenade by Adam the atom , distributed under a CC BY-SA 3.0 license.

Complaint Department grenade by Adam the atom , distributed under a CC BY-SA 3.0 license.

Complaining about things is pretty central to being a skeptic. Most skeptics are good complainers by their nature.

But if you want to be an effective skeptical activist, you need to know how to target your complaints properly. A blog post complaining about something (often the first resort for many skeptics) is only immediately effective if your blog has a large following. That’s nice for those that have it, but the rest of us usually need to take our complaints to a more effective venue. I’ve written before about complaining to government regulators using Fishbarrel, for instance. Complaining to the police via a change.org petition was a crucial step in getting a notorious Twitter spammer arrested.

In online activism, complaining often involves using the specialized complaint procedures of a particular website or platform. Most of the larger, well-established sites (Facebook, YouTube and so on) have relatively robust complaint procedures. Smaller sites will have less well-thought-out procedures, or perhaps none at all. But the key is to know what’s there, what the rules are around them, and when it is appropriate to use them.

There were two stories in the news recently about complaints involving websites that caught my eye. One involved skeptical activists using complaints to target Scientology. The other involved complaints in the opposite direction – from paranormalists about skeptics on Wikipedia. Let’s take a quick look at these two cases and see what we can learn about effective complaining.

Read more of this post

Morning Toolbox – November 9, 2012 – Bond Friday

Morning Toolbox is a (nearly) daily digest of interesting tools and techniques that skeptics can use online.

I’ve written about and talked about TruthMarket several times over the last few weeks, I think it could be cool skeptic tool. You should check it out. They just announced Chris Mooney has joined the Board of Advisors, joining other familiar faces like Shawn Otto and Michael Shermer.

Read on for more tools and ideas for skeptics working online…

Read more of this post

Morning Toolbox – November 8, 2012 – Post election catch-up

Morning Toolbox is a (nearly) daily digest of interesting tools and techniques that skeptics can use online.

Have to do some catch up today due to several missed toolboxes. (Things have been busy at my day job).

Simon Perry has updated the Fishbarrel plugin for Chrome.  This is a great skeptic tool for reporting online quackery. This fixes some bugs and adds support for some new forms, and it is now easily downloadable from the Chrome store. You should uninstall your existing copy first.

Read on for more tools and ideas for skeptics working online…

Read more of this post

Afternoon Toolbox – October 25, 2012 – Short news from CSICON

Morning Toolbox is a daily digest of interesting tools and techniques that skeptics can use online.

I’m at CSICON this weekend, so my toolbox posts may be a little short and often late in the morning

Another day, another Chrome browser plugin it seems. This one is called Unpolitic.me and it removes politics-related posts from your Twitter and Facebook feeds. Could be handy if you are tired of that stuff by now.

Wikipedia reformats their pages for mobile devices like smartphones, which is very very useful. They recently redesigned their mobile formatting to make it more legible and easier to use.

I mentioned Blekko the other day, this is an alternative search engine that lets you customize the results in ways that are difficult to do in Google. Handy for skeptic-oriented searches, among other things. They have posted new tutorials, so go learn about this tool.

PunditTracker is teasing that they may add some sort of incentive program next week.

Don’t forget you can vote in the Stitcher Podcast Awards once per day, give your favorite podcasts some love.

Another short toolbox, have another good day!

Follow me on Twitter at @krelnik.  You can submit stories there or via submit at whatstheharm.net.

Morning Toolbox – October 24, 2012 – Slow news? Here’s an infographic

Morning Toolbox is a daily digest of interesting tools and techniques that skeptics can use online.

Not a ton going on today, it seems – everyone must be getting ready for CSICON this weekend.

But as they say, a picture paints a thousand words, so here’s a picture of some Wikipedia statistics:

I’ve pointed out before how Wikipedia gets huge traffic compared to skeptic web sites. You can see here Paul Kurtz’s bio on Wikipedia got almost 17,000 views in two days after news of his passing. Good thing Susan Gerbic and her team are keeping an eye on this, helping ensure vandals don’t take advantage of this (as I mentioned yesterday).

WordPress updated their iOS app yesterday. I’m finding it more and more useful with each update, especially for moderating comments as they come in.

Don’t forget you can vote in the Stitcher Podcast Awards once per day, give your favorite podcasts some love.

Another short toolbox, have another good day!

Follow me on Twitter at @krelnik.  You can submit stories there or via submit at whatstheharm.net.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 14,915 other followers