Giving away FREE GOLD to anyone who posts in this thread!

[xXTheBlueWolfXx]

Quote:

Privacy
One privacy concern in the case of Wikipedia is the right of a private citizen to remain private: to remain a "private citizen" rather than a "public figure" in the eyes of the law.[66] It is a battle between the right to be anonymous in cyberspace and the right to be anonymous in real life ("meatspace" wink . A particular problem occurs in the case of an individual who is relatively unimportant and for whom there exists a Wikipedia page against her or his wishes.
In January 2006, a German court ordered the German Wikipedia shut down within Germany because it stated the full name of Boris Floricic, aka "Tron", a deceased hacker. On February 9, 2006, the injunction against Wikimedia Deutschland was overturned, with the court rejecting the notion that Tron's right to privacy or that of his parents was being violated.[67]
Wikipedia has a "Volunteer Response Team" that uses the OTRS system to handle queries without having to reveal the identities of the involved parties. This is used, for example, in confirming the permission for using individual images and other media in the project.

[xXTheBlueWolfXx]

Quote:

Community
Main article: Community of Wikipedia


Wikimania, an annual conference for users of Wikipedia and other projects operated by the Wikimedia Foundation.
Wikipedia's community has been described as cult-like,[68] although not always with entirely negative connotations,[69] and criticized for failing to accommodate inexperienced users.[70] The project's preference for cohesiveness, even if it requires compromise that includes disregard of credentials, has been referred to as "anti-elitism".[71]

[xXTheBlueWolfXx]

Quote:

Power structure
The Wikipedia community has established "a bureaucracy of sorts", including "a clear power structure that gives volunteer administrators the authority to exercise editorial control".[72][73][74]
Editors in good standing in the community can run for one of many levels of volunteer stewardship: this begins with "administrator",[75][76] a group of privileged users who have the ability to delete pages, lock articles from being changed in case of vandalism or editorial disputes, and block users from editing. Despite the name, administrators are not supposed to enjoy any special privilege in decision-making; instead, their powers are mostly limited to making edits that have project-wide effects and thus are disallowed to ordinary editors, and to block users making disruptive edits (such as vandalism).[77][78] As the process of vetting potential Wikipedia administrators has become more rigorous, fewer editors are promoted to admin status than in years past.[79]

[xXTheBlueWolfXx]

Quote:

Contributors
Demographics of Wikipedia editors
Wikipedia does not require that its editors provide identification.[80] However, as Wikipedia grew, "Who writes Wikipedia?" became one of the questions frequently asked on the project, often with a reference to other Web 2.0 projects such as Digg.[81] Wales once argued that only "a community ... a dedicated group of a few hundred volunteers" makes the bulk of contributions to Wikipedia and that the project is therefore "much like any traditional organization". Wales performed a study finding that over 50% of all the edits were done by just 0.7% of the users (at the time: 524 people). This method of evaluating contributions was later disputed by Aaron Swartz, who noted that several articles he sampled had large portions of their content (measured by number of characters) contributed by users with low edit counts.[82] A 2007 study by researchers from Dartmouth College found that "anonymous and infrequent contributors to Wikipedia [...] are as reliable a source of knowledge as those contributors who register with the site".[83]
In 2003, economics PhD student Andrea Ciffolilli argued that the low transaction costs of participating in wiki software create a catalyst for collaborative development, and that such features as easy access to past versions of a page favor "creative construction" over "creative destruction".[84] In his 2008 book, The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It, Zittrain cites Wikipedia's success as a case study in how open collaboration has fostered innovation on the web.[85] A 2008 study found that Wikipedians were less agreeable, open, and conscientious than others.[86][87] A 2009 study suggested there was "evidence of growing resistance from the Wikipedia community to new content".[88]
At OOPSLA 2009, Wikimedia chief technology officer and senior software architect Brion Vibber gave a presentation entitled "Community Performance Optimization: Making Your People Run as Smoothly as Your Site"[89] in which he discussed the challenges of handling the contributions from a large community and compared the process to that of software development.

[xXTheBlueWolfXx]

Did not realize how long " Wikipedia: wikipedia" is when I started this.




Oh well, I made between 3-4 k on this thread alone. It strikes me that it may just be holiday forums that grant larger sums for posts, but whatever. too tired to test that out. G'night.

[Bezant]

So cold!!

[Freaketta]

Sure, why not?
Snowballs welcome!

[Oops...I Arted]

[Ayanna Aes Sedai]

Well, played, OP, well played.

[Zeranyan]

-post-

dramallama

[Oops...I Arted]

[L O N E L 1 N E S S]

hit ... mee ... ?

[tulin13]

If ye say so smile

[ladybug9077]

Yeah let's see that really happen

[migasm]

welp