Cited by 28Wikis in Education and CollaborationDiscourse Analysis in Language StudiesDigital Communication and Language

Negotiating with angry mastodons: the wikipedia policy environment as genre ecology

Morgan, Jonathan T., Zachry, Mark·2010·Proceedings of the 16th ACM international conference on Supporting group work - GROUP '10

Abstract

Groups collaborating in online spaces on complex, extended projects develop behavioral conventions and agreed-upon practices to structure and regulate their interactions and work. Collaborators on Wikipedia have developed a multi-tiered policy environment to document a set of evolving principles, processes, and rules to facilitate productive group collaboration. Previous quantitative studies have noted this hierarchical structure, but have evaluated the policy environment as a singular entity rather than investigating potential differences between the three main regulatory genres that enable it. These studies also excluded essays, the least official regulatory genre, from their analyses. We perform a comparative content analysis of all three genres (policies, guidelines, and essays) and demonstrate that they focus on different areas of community regulation. Drawing on the theory of genre ecologies we discuss the possible role of unofficial genres such as essays in articulating and regulating work practices in online, organized collaborative work.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/1880071.1880098

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Strand 1 also offers useful concepts for professional communication, which has studied peer and social production in open source software, Wikipedia, other peer production sites, and social media.

    “Yet Strand 1 also offers productive concepts for professional communication, which has examined peer and social production in open source software and support, Wikipedia, and other peer production sites, and social media [24][30] [31].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Morgan, J. T., & Zachry, M.
Affiliations
University of Washington (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the 16th ACM international conference on Supporting group work - GROUP '10
Publisher
ACM Press
Published
2010
Pages
165
OpenAlex
W2028384182
Cited by
28
References
13
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 3
Type
conference abstract
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work (GROUP) (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Wikis in Education and Collaboration
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Digital Communication and Language
Keywords
Wikipedia, online collaboration, community regulation, collaborative work practices, organizational communication

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review