Wikipedia Politics

By GAN, Lihao et al.

Book Id: WPLBN0100750751
Format Type: PDF (eBook)
File Size: 95.85 MB.
Reproduction Date: 7/5/2025

Title:	Wikipedia Politics
Author:	GAN, Lihao et al.
Volume:
Language:	Chinese
Subject:	Non Fiction, Political Science
Collections:	Authors Community, Politics
Historic Publication Date:	2025
Publisher:	Global Center for Digital Knowledge Research

Member Page:	lihao gan
Citation APA MLA Chicago Al. Ga, L. E. (2025). Wikipedia Politics. Retrieved from http://self.gutenberg.org/

Description
As a new model and platform of knowledge production emerging in the internet age, the rise of Wikipedia is undoubtedly of epochal significance. Its collaborative, pluralistic, open, egalitarian, de-monopolized, and de-nationalized modes of editing and compilation have, to a certain extent, reshaped the cartography of human knowledge and modes of cognition, making it a subject of immense research value. The three-volume work The Politics of Wikipedia, compiled over a decade by Professor Gan Lihao of East China Normal University and his team, is the most in-depth, substantial, and outstanding academic study of Wikipedia I have seen in China to date. By examining the definitions and editorial processes of commonly used and publicly significant or controversial Wikipedia entries, the book reveals the power struggles and discursive contests embedded in the global knowledge production of the Wikipedia encyclopedia. In the authors’ view, while the "politics of discourse" within Wikipedia diverges markedly from traditional modes of knowledge production, the element of "power competition" has not disappeared as a result of its collaborative and open structure. On the contrary, it has become more intricate. The book argues that with the evolution of media technologies—particularly the application of large language models in knowledge production—Wikipedia’s mechanisms of knowledge creation and dissemination will face new challenges, and "Wikipedia politics" will assume new forms. These judgments and conclusions are undoubtedly insightful and thought-provoking. Beyond its intellectual depth and academic value, the compilation and publication of this work also embody the authors’ courage and detachment. In a country where Wikipedia is not freely accessible, researching and publishing such a monograph is unquestionably an act of commendable bravery. Moreover, the choice to publish it as an open-access digital work—despite the fact that such outcomes are not easily accounted for within the metrics of the current academic evaluation system—further demonstrates a spirit that transcends institutional constraints. This reveals the authors' scholarly ethos of standing "above the fray." As a long-time friend of Professor Gan Lihao, I deeply admire this research attitude and am delighted to see this work come to fruition. I hope its publication will reach and benefit a wider scholarly audience. — Pan Xianghui, Professor and Doctoral Supervisor, Nanjing University, Changjiang Young Scholar, Ministry of Education of China

Summary
All wisdom is collective, including the brain itself, which is a collection of neurons. But not all collectives are wise. Only by thoroughly analyzing and understanding the issues raised by Wikipedia knowledge can we truly grasp what Wikipedia really is: an encyclopedia, a communication platform, a social media site, a metaverse, an internet commune, a global movement, or even a mysterious religious organization? Only by clarifying the mechanisms of Wikipedia’s knowledge production and dissemination can we ensure that this greatest knowledge repository of the 21st century avoids the tragedy of the commons in its future development, continues to attract vast numbers of internet users to voluntarily contribute, be continuously updated and expanded, and be organized and stored with high quality—becoming the greatest recorder, integrator, and representative of human knowledge in the vast universe, and perhaps even travel with future deep-space technologies into the stars and seas. Wikipedia politics is not only a politics of knowledge, but also a key component of the politics of the metaverse. As media technologies evolve, the political institutions, regime structures, and strategies of open-source societies in the metaverse develop characteristics that are radically different from those in the real world. This gives rise to a series of new propositions: — Human-Machine Knowledge Politics: What political characteristics emerge in a human-machine society where humans coexist with robots? How does this structure produce and disseminate Wikipedia knowledge? What exactly is Wikipedia politics? — Algorithmic Knowledge Politics: How do the top-level designs and bottom-level distributions of algorithms and code affect the production and dissemination of Wikipedia knowledge, and how do they determine the legitimacy of knowledge? — Big Data Knowledge Politics: How do various big data tools provide references for the Wikipedia community, assist in political games, and enhance the legitimacy of their own knowledge? — AR/VR/MR Knowledge Politics: This is the futuristic orientation of Wikipedia politics. How do virtual reality technologies influence Wikipedians’ embodied experiences? How do they change spatial and temporal perceptions of knowledge production, storage, and dissemination? How do avatar and multi-identity societies affect reading experiences and user perceptions, and how do these, in turn, impact the legitimacy of human knowledge? In addition to technological transformations, ideological currents also profoundly influence the production and dissemination of Wikipedia knowledge. That is, emerging ideological waves around the globe give rise to pioneering and timely Wikipedia entries. — Feminist Knowledge Politics: How does the global awakening of women change the content of Wikipedia and reshape the structure of human knowledge? — Swarmist Knowledge Politics: Swarmism, in essence, is populism, which can counter elitism. The Wikipedia community believes that high-quality knowledge can be produced through the swarm-style compiling efforts of the masses, even more effectively than by elites. This belief draws from three ideological currents: 1. Communism – the belief that the collective power of global people can create the greatest encyclopedia in human history. 2. Liberalism – faith in market-based participation, where high-quality knowledge will survive and low-quality knowledge will be deleted by the community. 3. Evolutionism – belief that Wikipedia knowledge evolves like species through natural selection, with survival-of-the-fittest mechanisms. Like genes, Wikipedia entries mutate, replicate, or are pruned—some thrive, others disappear. Together, Wikipedians form a collective brain, with each member like a neuron contributing to a perfect mind. — Pluralist Knowledge Politics: Since Wikipedia claims to build a “comprehensive and balanced human encyclopedia,” pluralism is necessarily its mainstream ideology. How can knowledge from LGBTQ+ groups, Africa, or remote island nations be better and more effectively integrated into Wikipedia? In reality, these ideological movements not only give rise to Wikipedia’s knowledge production but also influence how its legitimacy is evaluated. For example, the feminist movement emerged within the community due to dissatisfaction with Wikipedia's male-centric biases—like the underrepresentation of women editors or how women are written about through a patriarchal lens. Similarly, the pluralist movement arose from the recognition that Wikipedia's knowledge is heavily shaped by the views of white elites in developed countries. Wikipedians therefore advocate not only for adding marginalized knowledge within the platform but also for going offline—working with local elites and peoples in remote areas to ensure free access, enable self-education, and transform readers into editors who can contribute local knowledge to humanity. Among all these knowledge politics paradigms, Swarmist Knowledge Politics faces the fiercest challenges. Elite-oriented scholars dismiss it as digital Maoism. They distrust the masses, calling the Wikipedia community a "mob," and see its challenge to elite knowledge as a Cultural Revolution-style movement of ignorance. While evolutionism, liberalism, and communism all believe in collective wisdom, elitism vehemently opposes it, arguing that the conditions for “wisdom of the crowds” (e.g., independence, lack of mutual influence, absence of opinion leaders) are not met in Wikipedia. Instead, Wikipedia is a product of intense debate, negotiation, and compromise, filled with influencers. Elitists even criticize egalitarianism, doubting that Wikipedia can achieve even average encyclopedia quality. Besides being deeply tied to ideology, Wikipedia knowledge is also entangled with semiotic politics—knowledge systems are built through the selection and arrangement of symbols. Therefore, studying how Wikipedians play symbolic games is also a key aspect of Wikipedia politics. — Visual Knowledge Politics: Carefully analyzing Wikipedia's use of images (maps, portraits, visualized data), their selection, organization, replacement, and interpretation reveals the underlying discursive battles and strategic games in the community. — Translational Knowledge Politics: Wikipedia spans over 300 language communities. Many entries are not independently created in each community but translated from “featured articles” or entries from dominant communities. This translation process is not neutral—it is mediated, filtered, and reconstructed, often with political and ideological motives. — Data Knowledge Politics: Mathematical symbols are often seen as objective or scientific, even as carriers of natural laws. But once this belief is established, data becomes a rhetorical tool used by all sides. Selection and interpretation of data become crucial for legitimizing one’s version of knowledge within the Wikipedia game. Hence, exploring data battles is also vital in Wikipedia political studies. Wikipedia politics also concerns the governance structure of the community, involving two levels: 1. Internal Political Structure: Is the Wikipedia community populist, meritocratic, or theocratic? If it is populist, why do administrators, arbitrators, stewards, and influencers hold so much power—power to determine what knowledge is legitimate or not? If it's meritocratic or republican, how can we explain that most content is created by anonymous users and ordinary editors? Why is founder Jimmy Wales, known as the “benevolent dictator,” so influential yet often restrained by the community—even when editing his own résumé? How should we understand the love-hate relationship between the Wikimedia Foundation and its community? Wikipedia may have created a political structure in the metaverse that has no precedent in the real world—one that effectively mobilizes tens of thousands of users and prevents the tragedy of the commons. 2. External Political Embedding: How does Wikipedia as a knowledge entity integrate with real-world national regimes and international orders? Is Wikipedia knowledge a resistance to existing orders, or merely a mirror? As a cyberpunk and cyber-commune legacy of 1960s American counterculture, how does Wikipedia retain Habermas’s vision of the public sphere’s watchdog function in today’s world? How can its governance be optimized to avoid systemic bias such as patriarchy or Western hegemonic ideology? Finally, we must not overlook the role of emotional knowledge politics. Emotions are powerful psychological drivers behind knowledge production. Wikipedia is not driven by power or capital, but by passion. But how long can such utopian enthusiasm last? How can the community sustain its motivation?How do the emotions in Dominique Moïsi’s geopolitics of emotion—hope, fear, humiliation—or Max Scheler’s notion of resentment influence the legitimacy of Wikipedia knowledge? Ultimately, the acceptance of Wikipedia knowledge is also a political process, filled with discursive struggles. Reading and interpretation are not purely private acts; they are social and cultural phenomena shaped by readers’ historical and social contexts. Are readers engaging in communal or individual reading? Is it linear or hyperlink-based? Is it receptive, negotiated, or critical reading? How do production and reception intertwine? All of the above are what this book hopes to describe and explain through the lens of digital knowledge sociology and digital knowledge politics—to answer the question: What is the political science of Wikipedia?

Excerpt
“One of the core beliefs of the Wiki world is that whatever problems exist in the Wiki will be gradually corrected over time as the process unfolds.” My response is simple: this so-called “core belief” is not one I hold, and to my knowledge, it is not held by any important or distinguished Wikipedian either. We do not hold any particular faith in the collective or collectivism as a mode of writing. The authors of Wikipedia, just like elsewhere, exercise their own individual judgment in producing content. The best guiding principle is to always cherish the supremacy of the individual.

Table of Contents
Volume I: The Wikipedia Encyclopedia from the Perspective of Knowledge Politics Understanding the Wikipedia Encyclopedia Global Center for Digital and Intelligent Knowledge Studies (Supervised by Gan Lihao) Knowledge Production and Dissemination of Wikipedia from the Perspective of Media Activism Gao Hairui (Supervised by Gan Lihao) Opportunities and Challenges for China’s External Communication on the Wikipedia Platform Gan Lihao, Weng Binting Fact Construction on Wikipedia from the Perspective of Actor-Network Theory Cao Wenwen (Supervised by Gan Lihao) Knowledge Dissemination on Wikipedia from a Feminist Perspective Lin Shan (Supervised by Gan Lihao) International Wikimania Conferences from the Perspective of Interaction Ritual Chain Theory Ding Yao (Supervised by Gan Lihao) Wikipedia Knowledge Production in the Era of Large Language Models: Opportunities, Challenges, and the Future Gan Lihao Volume II: The Self-Organizing Mechanism of Wikipedia's Open-Source Knowledge Production Mosaic Knowledge: Wikipedia from the Perspective of Environmental Drama Theory Gan Lihao, Wang Hao Knowledge Construction of Online Encyclopedias from a Spatial Perspective Gan Lihao, Hu Jie Digital Discourse Frameworks in Wikipedia Gan Lihao, Guan Yonglu, Fei Jin Human–Machine Society in Wikipedia from the Perspective of Recognition Theory Gan Lihao Knowledge and Discursive Power: Collective Editing by Wikipedia Bots Gan Lihao, Liu Xinyu A New Era: Robot Intervention in Wikipedia Knowledge Compilation Liu Xinyu (Supervised by Gan Lihao) Knowledge Sharing Movements under Intellectual Property Regulation in Wikipedia Jing Chuyan (Supervised by Gan Lihao) Rules and Games: Naming Politics in Wikipedia’s Collective Compilation Gan Lihao (Supervised by Gan Lihao) Disambiguation Struggles: Knowledge Dissemination in Wikipedia’s Digital Space Gan Lihao, Fei Jin, Jing Chuyan Redirect Games: Knowledge Construction on Wikipedia Li Juan (Supervised by Gan Lihao) Attribution Studies of Collaborative Editing between Wikipedia and Baidu Baike Zhang Haili (Supervised by Gan Lihao) Norms and Strategies: Neutrality Principle and Collective Knowledge Construction on Wikipedia Li Jingxian (Supervised by Gan Lihao) Objectivity as a Rhetorical Resource: The Problem of Knowledge Construction in Wikipedia Wu Di (Supervised by Gan Lihao) Consensus and Strategy: A Study on the Balance Principle of Wikipedia Weng Binting (Supervised by Gan Lihao) Credibility Construction of Information Sources on Wikipedia Xin Huijun (Supervised by Gan Lihao) Categorization Games: Knowledge Construction in Wikipedia Chen Danyi (Supervised by Gan Lihao) Voting Mechanisms in Wikipedia’s Knowledge Construction Han Xiaoxiao (Supervised by Gan Lihao) Volume III: Case Studies in the Politics of Wikipedia Knowledge Knowledge Legitimacy in Wikipedia: The Sovereignty Dispute in the “Diaoyu Islands” Article Gan Lihao, Pang Yanru Collective Resistance and Popular Will: Discursive Struggles in Social Conflict Articles on Wikipedia and Baidu Baike – A Case Study of “Wukan” Zhang Yaqiong (Supervised by Gan Lihao) Sovereignty Imagination in the “Taiwan” Articles: A Comparative Study of Wikipedia and Baidu Baike Zhu Weibing (Supervised by Gan Lihao) Suppression and Counterterrorism: Discursive Representations of Terrorism on Wikipedia and Baidu Baike – A Case Study of the “Ürümqi 7/5 Incident” Zhao Mi (Supervised by Gan Lihao) Discursive Frameworks in the Collaborative Editing of Public Safety Incident Articles: Case Studies of the “Tianjin Explosion” and “Texas Explosion” Liu Guan (Supervised by Gan Lihao) Cross-Cultural Knowledge Dissemination: A Collaborative Editing Study of the Wikipedia Entry on “Laozi” Zhou Xinyi (Supervised by Gan Lihao) The Politics of Disease Naming in Wikipedia: A Comparative Study of COVID-19 Articles in English and Chinese He Yuanyuan (Supervised by Gan Lihao) The Evolution of Open-Source Knowledge on Wikipedia: A Case Study of the “Evolution” Entry Chen Yiru (Supervised by Gan Lihao)