Openpedia.org > danah boyd on the Seigenthaler-Wikipedia Controversy
[Thinking About Technology] I reminded academics that Wikipedia provides information to people who dont have access to books and that mostly-good information is far better than none. Most importantly, i reminded academics that the vast majority of articles on Wikipedia are super solid and...
Some related posts from Technorati and Google.
![]()
[Corante.com] Wikipedia, academia and Seigenthaler. Many-to-Many:: As the conversation progressed, someone pointed out that Wikipedia’s policies and platform supports Seigenthaler’s concern that “irresponsible vandals [can] write anything they want about anybody.” Much to my complete and utter joy, Jimmy Wales responded with a fantastic structural comparison that i felt should be surfaced from the mailing list and shared to the world at large:
[Zephoria.org] apophenia: Wikipedia, academia and Seigenthaler: But they felt as though it was a problem that Wikipedia would allow for a man to be defamed. As the conversation progressed, someone pointed out that Wikipedia's policies and platform supports Seigenthaler's concern that "irresponsible vandals [can] write anything they want about anybody." Much to my complete and utter joy, Jimmy Wales responded with a fantastic structural comparison that i felt should be surfaced from the mailing list and shared to the world at large:
[geosciblog] While We Continue to Sleep: Shortly before the book's publication, the Council on American-Islamic Relations issued two press releases insulting Durán and demanding that his book be withheld until a group of CAIR-approved academics could review it "for stereotypical or inaccurate content.""
[It's all good] Academic blogging: The author, Robert Boynton, a non-blogging academic, raises some interesting points about academic antipathy to blogging. This one reminded me of the debate among librarians' about the worth(lessness) of Wikipedia.
[Feral Scholar] Gender & Power - A TUTORIAL, Postmodernism: “Although biological determinism had been criticized quite early in the womens movement as a method of explaining mans patriarchal dominance by the biological difference between the genders, the postmodernists tabooed even the use of such concepts as ”woman, ”mother, ”land, ”patriarchy, ”capitalism, and so on. The fact that women have the capacity to bring forth children, that they can become mothers, is totally devalued, de-historicized and dematerialized. It is considered to be a mere biological accident which nowadays can be changed by biotechnology. The same applies to the category ”woman. The fact that most people appear in this world as male or female is not accepted as a given, because it is possible today physically to change ones gender or ones sexual orientation. The gender discourse in particular contributed to the elimination of such categories as ”mother, or ”woman. In this discourse ”sex as supposedly biologically determined and ”gender as culturally constructed are being separated and contraposed. This results in the old schizophrenic situation that ”sex is again dehistoricized and declared a matter of biology only, which can be left to reproduction and genetic engineers, while ”gender becomes the ”higher affair, where culture plays the determining role. Old dualism in new garb.”
[spirit farmer] What does "missional" mean? As I was in the semin...: As I was in the seminary lecture the other day, I used the word "missional" a few times. After one of these times, one of the students asked me to clarify what I meant by that term.
![]()
[Corante.com] Many-to-Many:: As the conversation progressed, someone pointed out that Wikipedia’s policies and platform supports Seigenthaler’s concern that “irresponsible vandals [can] write anything they want about anybody.” Much to my complete and utter joy, Jimmy Wales responded with a fantastic structural comparison that i felt should be surfaced from the mailing list and shared to the world at large:
[Zephoria.org] apophenia: But they felt as though it was a problem that Wikipedia would allow for a man to be defamed. As the conversation progressed, someone pointed out that Wikipedia's policies and platform supports Seigenthaler's concern that "irresponsible vandals [can] write anything they want about anybody." Much to my complete and utter joy, Jimmy Wales responded with a fantastic structural comparison that i felt should be surfaced from the mailing list and shared to the world at large:
[Planetkm.org] Planet KM: I reminded academics that Wikipedia provides information to people who donât have access to books and that mostly-good information is far better than none.
Reflected tags on Technorati: Blog, Wikipedia, Openpedia.org