deletionism and inclusionism in Wikipedia

Because of concerns about vandalism and appropriateness of content, most wikis require policies regarding inclusion.{{cite book | first=Lowell | last=Bryan | title= Mobilizing Minds: Creating Wealth from Talent in the 21st Century Organization | page=223 | publisher= McGraw-Hill | year =2007 | isbn =978-0-07-149082-5}} Wikipedia has developed spaces for policy and conflict resolution regarding the disputes for individual articles.Yochai Benkler, The Wealth of Networks, p. 73, Yale University Press (2006), {{ISBN|978-0-300-12577-1}} These debates, which can be initiated by anyone,{{cite web| url = http://courseware.hbs.edu/public/cases/wikipedia/| title = Debates and Controversies in Wikipedia| author1 = Karim R. Lakhani| author2 = Andrew P. McAfee| publisher = Harvard Business School| year = 2007| access-date = 2008-01-23| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20070202031333/http://courseware.hbs.edu/public/cases/wikipedia/| archive-date = 2007-02-02}}{{cite news|last=Baker|first=Nicholson|title=How I fell in love with Wikipedia|url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2008/apr/10/wikipedia.internet|access-date=8 March 2012|newspaper=The Guardian|date=9 April 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131104130336/http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2008/apr/10/wikipedia.internet|archive-date=4 November 2013|url-status=live}} take place on an "Articles for deletion" page{{cite news |author=David Segal |date=2006-12-03 |title=Look Me Up Under 'Missing Link': On Wikipedia, Oblivion Looms for the Non-Notable |newspaper=The Washington Post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/02/AR2006120201111_pf.html |url-status=live |access-date=2008-01-23 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081016140408/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/02/AR2006120201111_pf.html |archive-date=2008-10-16}} (often referred to by editors as AfD). Much discussion concerns not only the content of each article in question, but also "differing perspectives on how to edit an ideal encyclopedia."{{cite web| url = https://www.retts.net/documents/cnarrativeDAC.pdf| title = All Together Now: Collective Knowledge, Collective Narratives, and Architectures of Participation| author = Scott Rettberg of The Richard Stockton College of New Jersey| page = 8| publisher = Digital Arts and Culture Conference Proceedings| year = 2005| access-date = 2008-01-24| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080121183703/http://retts.net/documents/cnarrativeDAC.pdf| archive-date = 2008-01-21| url-status = live}}

At the end of each debate, an administrator judges the quality of the community consensus. Articles that do not require debate can be flagged and deleted without debate by administrators.{{cite web

| url = http://www.wikisym.org/ws2006/proceedings/p3.pdf

| title = How and Why Wikipedia Works: An Interview with Angela Beesley, Elisabeth Bauer, and Kizu Naoko

| author = Dirk Riehle

| publisher = International Symposium on Wikis

| date = 2006-08-23

| access-date = 2008-01-26

| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080724203805/http://www.wikisym.org/ws2006/proceedings/p3.pdf

| archive-date = 2008-07-24

| url-status = dead

}} If the administrator's decision is disputed, then the discussion can be taken to "deletion review", where the community discusses the administrator's decision. In controversial cases, the debates can spread to other places on the Internet.{{cite news

|url = http://www.theinquirer.net/en/inquirer/news/2006/07/19/let-cher-price-join-everywhere-girl-in-the-dustbin-of-history

|title = Let Cher Price join Everywhere Girl in the dustbin of history

|author = The Letterman

|work = The Inquirer

|date = 2006-07-19

|access-date = 2008-01-23

|url-status = unfit

|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080310075217/http://www.theinquirer.net/en/inquirer/news/2006/07/19/let-cher-price-join-everywhere-girl-in-the-dustbin-of-history

|archive-date = 2008-03-10

}}

A 2006 estimate was that pages about Wikipedia governance and policy entries were one of the fastest-growing areas of Wikipedia and contained about one-quarter of its content.{{cite news

| url = http://www.economist.com/printedition/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10789354

| title = The battle for Wikipedia's soul

| newspaper = The Economist

| date = 2008-03-06

| access-date = 2008-03-07

| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080310000011/http://www.economist.com/printedition/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10789354

| archive-date = 2008-03-10

| url-status = live

}}

File:Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians (2016).png (AIW)]]

File:Association of Deletionist Wikipedians (2016).png

The "Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians" and the "Association of Deletionist Wikipedians" were founded by administrators.{{dubious|reason=Source appears to be in error, as these two are not equivalent. The former is a mostly sincere group of like-minded editors, while the latter is a tongue-in-cheek parody of the former.|date=July 2018}} Each has a Wikimedia page listing their respective members, charters and principles. While written in humorous tones, they reveal the perceived importance of Wikipedia held by the members.

Inclusionists may argue that the interest of a few is a sufficient condition for the existence of an article, since such articles are harmless and there is no restriction on space in Wikipedia. Favoring the idiosyncratic and subjective, an inclusionist slogan is "Wikipedia is not paper."

On the other hand, deletionists favor objectivity and conformity, holding that "Wikipedia is not Google", a "junkyard", or "a dumping ground for facts".{{cite news |author=David Sarno |date=2007-09-30 |title=Wikipedia wars erupt |work=Los Angeles Times |url=http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-ca-webscout30sep30,0,344107.story?coll=la-home-center |url-status=live |access-date=2008-01-23 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071213050011/http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-ca-webscout30sep30,0,344107.story?coll=la-home-center |archive-date=2007-12-13}} They argue that the interest of enough people is a necessary condition for article quality, and articles about trivial subjects damage the credibility and future success of Wikipedia. They advocate the establishment and enforcement of specific standards and policies as a form of jurisprudence.

According to veteran contributor Geoff Burling, newer members are less likely to have helped delete articles that should have been kept in hindsight, and therefore have learned less about exercising caution in the deletion process. Journalism professor K. G. Schneider has identified the mentality of deletionism as having manifested once the emphasis of the encyclopedia shifted from quantity to quality.{{cite web| url = http://www.cio.com/article/141650/Wikipedia_s_Awkward_Adolescence/1| title = Wikipedia's Awkward Adolescence| author = K. G. Schneider| work = CIO| publisher = IDG| date = 2007-09-26| access-date = 2008-01-23| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20071011065504/http://cio.com/article/141650/Wikipedia_s_Awkward_Adolescence/1| archive-date = 2007-10-11| url-status = live}}

In early 2007, Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger identified himself as an inclusionist, except on certain topics pertaining to sexuality, for his Citizendium project.{{cite web |author=Nate Anderson |date=2007-02-25 |title=Citizendium: building a better Wikipedia |url=https://arstechnica.com/articles/culture/citizendium.ars/3 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081020001720/http://arstechnica.com/articles/culture/citizendium.ars/3 |archive-date=2008-10-20 |access-date=2008-01-23 |website=Ars Technica}} Former Wikimedia Foundation executive director Katherine Maher also identifies as inclusionist.{{cite web |author=The University of Melbourne |date=3 May 2017 |title=Democratisation of Knowledge with Katherine Maher |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BuyKmjy7Rw&t=1h3m4s |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191219012356/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BuyKmjy7Rw&t=1h3m4s |archive-date=19 December 2019 |access-date=21 October 2021 |website=YouTube}} Andrew Lih, a deletionist-turned-inclusionist, observes a cultural shift from Wikipedia's initial expansion in that it has become more cautious. He changed his position when an article he created about the social networking website Pownce was speedily deleted by another administrator as advertising.

File:Deletionpedia Logo.svg logo]]

A "Wikimorgue", in which all deleted articles and their edit histories would be retained, has been suggested as a means to provide greater transparency in the deletion process.

In an effort to promote a middle ground between the two philosophies, the "Association of Mergist Wikipedians" was created in November 2004,{{cite news | url = https://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2006-02-27-wikipedians_x.htm | title = Inside the world of Wikipedians, there's drama, politics and love | author = Nicole Gaudiano | work = USA Today | date = 2006-02-27 | access-date = 2008-01-23 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080506171536/http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2006-02-27-wikipedians_x.htm | archive-date = 2008-05-06 | url-status = live }} emphasizing the possibility of merging articles together as an alternative to both outright deletion of content and the retention of separate articles for less important subjects. A merge from one article to another is executed by moving the relevant content from the former to the latter, and redirecting the former to the latter.

Documentarian Jason Scott has noted the large amount of wasted effort that goes into deletion debates.{{cite web

| url = http://www.cow.net/transcript.txt

| title = The Great Failure of Wikipedia

| author = Jason Scott

| publisher = Notacon 3

| date = 2006-04-08

| access-date = 2008-01-23

| format = transcript

| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080107213458/http://www.cow.net/transcript.txt

| archive-date = 2008-01-07

| url-status = live

}} Deletion debates may contribute to community disintegration, restriction of information,{{cite news

|first = Janice

|last = Tibbets

|title = Wikipedia warriors hit delete

|url = https://nationalpost.com/news/world/story.html?id=199409

|work = National Post

|date = 2007-12-27

|access-date = 2009-03-23

}}{{dead link|date=October 2017|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}} or a decrease in the rate of article creation that suggests a decrease in passion and motivation amongst editors.Konrad Lischka, October 12, 2007, Wikipedia-Leidenschaft kühlt ab, [http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/web/0,1518,511134,00.html Spiegel.de] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080103120429/http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/web/0,1518,511134,00.html |date=2008-01-03 }} Being explicitly called an inclusionist or deletionist can sidetrack the issue from the actual debate. Nevertheless, some have observed that the interaction between the two groups may actually result in an enhancement of overall quality of content.{{cite news |author=Brock Read |date=2007-10-03 |title=A War of Words on Wikipedia |work=The Chronicle of Higher Education |url=http://chronicle.com/wiredcampus/index.php?id=2426 |url-status=dead |access-date=2008-01-23 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080310081710/http://chronicle.com/wiredcampus/index.php?id=2426 |archive-date=2008-03-10}}

Startup accelerator and angel investor Y Combinator co-founder Paul Graham, on a page of "Startup Ideas We'd Like to Fund", lists "More open alternatives to Wikipedia", in which he laments:

Deletionists rule Wikipedia. Ironically, they're constrained by print-era thinking. What harm does it do if an online reference has a long tail of articles that are only interesting to a few people, so long as everyone can still find whatever they're looking for? There is room to do to Wikipedia what Wikipedia did to Britannica.{{cite web|url=http://ycombinator.com/ideas.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140625053109/http://ycombinator.com/ideas.html|url-status=dead|archive-date=2014-06-25|title = Startup Ideas We'd Like to Fund|last = Graham| first = Paul|date=July 2008|publisher = Y Combinator}}

Novelist Nicholson Baker recounted how an article on the beat poet Richard Denner was deleted as "non-notable",{{efn-ua|The article has since been restored.}} and criticised the behaviour of vigilante editors on Wikipedia in The New York Review of Books:{{cite journal|url=http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21131|title=The Charms of Wikipedia|author=Nicholson Baker|journal=The New York Review of Books|volume=55|issue=4|date=2008-03-20|access-date=2008-02-29|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100304081445/http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21131|archive-date=2010-03-04|url-status=live}} {{Blockquote|There are some people on Wikipedia now who are just bullies, who take pleasure in wrecking and mocking people's work – even to the point of laughing at non-standard "Engrish." They poke articles full of warnings and cita{{not a typo|tion-nee}}ded notes and deletion prods till the topics go away.}}

Such debates have sparked the creation of websites critical of Wikipedia such as Wikitruth, which watches for articles in risk of deletion. Wikinews editor Brian McNeil has been quoted as saying that every encyclopedia experiences internal battles, the difference being that those of Wikipedia are public.

At the 2005 Digital Arts and Culture Conference, the two groups were discussed as examples among "Eventualism" and "Immediatism" in a successful large-scale architecture of participation. The existence of these groups was mentioned in a study by the Harvard Business School which reviewed the deletion debate over an article on Enterprise 2.0.

The Institut national de recherche pédagogique (National Institute for Educational Research) in France, in case studies of Wikipedia, reported that while it was difficult to measure the influence of the groups as of April 2006, their existence is indicative of Wikipedia's internal dynamics consisting of multiple identities,

{{cite journal

| url = http://www.inrp.fr/vst/Dossiers/Wikipedia/Dossier_Wikipedia.pdf

| title = L'édition de référence libre et collaborative : le cas de Wikipedia

| journal = Les Dossiers de la Veille

| page = 25

| date = April 2006

| language = fr

| access-date = 2008-01-24

| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20070926232800/http://www.inrp.fr/vst/Dossiers/Wikipedia/Dossier_Wikipedia.pdf

| archive-date = 2007-09-26

| url-status = dead

}}

and may play progressively increasing roles.{{cite journal

| url = https://edutice.archives-ouvertes.fr/edutice-00184888/document

| title = La communauté comme auteur et éditeur: l'exemple de Wikipédia

| author = Laure Endrizzi

| journal = Journée d'études des URFIST

| publisher = Institut national de recherche pédagogique

| format = DOC

| pages = 7–8

| date = 2007-01-31

| language = fr

| access-date = 2008-01-24

| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20180111052722/https://edutice.archives-ouvertes.fr/edutice-00184888/document

| archive-date = 2018-01-11

| url-status = live

}}

In the Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, a study of Wikipedia's social dynamics called inclusionism and deletionism the two most prominent associations within Wikipedia. They observe that users in the same role (administrator, etc.) may hold different perspectives, and that "the diversity of member [information quality] preferences and the low cost of forming or switching associations may encourage schism in an existing association or evolution of new groups." At the same time, the associations may help to better critique existing policies and to find and achieve points of convergence.{{cite journal

|url=http://mailer.fsu.edu/~bstvilia/papers/stvilia_wikipedia_infoWork_p.pdf

|doi=10.1002/asi.20813

|title=Information Quality Work Organization in Wikipedia

|author1-first=Besiki |author1-last=Stvilia

|author2-first =Michael B. |author2-last= Twidale

|author3-first =Linda C. |author3-last= Smith

|author4-first =Les |author4-last= Gasser

|journal=Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

|volume=59

|issue=6

|pages=983–1001

|year=2007

|access-date=2008-01-24

|url-status=dead

|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070820183345/http://mailer.fsu.edu/~bstvilia/papers/stvilia_wikipedia_infoWork_p.pdf

|archive-date=2007-08-20

|citeseerx=10.1.1.163.5109

|s2cid=10156153

}}

Futurist Vasilis Kostakis argued that the existence of deletionism vs inclusionist conflict illustrates the imperfect governance model of Wikipedia, and ambiguity of its rules that can only be resolved through conflict.{{Cite journal |last=Kostakis |first=Vasilis |date=2010-03-12 |title=Peer governance and Wikipedia: Identifying and understanding the problems of Wikipedia's governance |url=https://journals.uic.edu/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2613 |journal=First Monday |doi=10.5210/fm.v15i3.2613 |issn=1396-0466 |doi-access= free|url-access=subscription }}

Since the communities of different language versions of Wikipedia set their own notability standards, they have in some cases diverged substantially. Writing for {{Lang|de|Die Zeit}}, Kai Biermann describes the German Wikipedia as being dominated by "exclusionists", whereas he calls the English Wikipedia "inclusionist";{{cite news |last=Biermann |first=Kai |date=23 October 2009 |work=Die Zeit |title=Die Diktatur der Relevanz |trans-title=The Dictatorship of Relevance |url=http://www.zeit.de/digital/internet/2009-10/wikipedia-streit-fefe |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091118030909/http://www.zeit.de/digital/internet/2009-10/wikipedia-streit-fefe?page=all |archive-date=18 November 2009 |url-status=live}} although c't author Torsten Kleinz commented that the English Wikipedia has for several years required users to have registered accounts to create articles, which German Wikipedia does not.{{cite news |last=Kleinz |first=Torsten |date=30 October 2009 |work=c't |title=Wikipedia: Der Kampf um die Relevanz |trans-title=Wikipedia: The Battle of Relevance |url=http://www.heise.de/ct/artikel/Wikipedia-Der-Kampf-um-die-Relevanz-846332.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091102042737/http://www.heise.de/ct/artikel/Wikipedia-Der-Kampf-um-die-Relevanz-846332.html |archive-date=2 November 2009 |url-status=live}} A debate in late 2009 over inclusion of several articles led to criticism in the German blogosphere of such vehemence and volume that the German Wikimedia held a meeting with several bloggers and German Wikipedia administrators regarding the German Wikipedia's notability criteria, and issued a press statement.

• {{section link|Criticism of Wikipedia|Notability of article topics}}
• Deletion of articles on Wikipedia
• Digital preservation
• Lumpers and splitters
• Systemic bias in Wikipedia

{{Reflist}}

{{notelist-ua}}

• {{cite book

| title = The Missing Manual: Wikipedia

| author = John Broughton

| publisher = Pogue

| isbn = 978-0-596-51516-4

| date = 2008-01-25

| title-link = The Missing Manual: Wikipedia

}}

• {{cite web | url = https://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-pavley/wikipedia-and-the-hidden-_b_1673412.html | title = Wikipedia and the Hidden Deletionist Agenda | first = John | last = Pavley | date = 14 July 2012 | work = Huffington Post | access-date = 25 April 2013}}

At Wikimedia Meta Wiki

• Conflicting Wikipedia Philosophies
• Deletionism
• Exclusionism
• Inclusionism
• Similar concepts: Immediatism and Eventualism
• Keep history, an essay related to Wikimedia
• Association of Deletionist Wikipedians
• Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians

Miscellaneous

• {{self-reference link|Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not an indisriminate collection of information|Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information}}, a Wikipedia policy cited by deletionists
• {{self-reference link|Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia|Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia}}, a Wikipedia policy cited by inclusionsists
• [http://boingboing.net/2017/02/14/watching-wikipedias-extincti.html Watching Wikipedia's Extinction Event From A Distance] at Boing Boing
• [http://boingboing.net/2017/02/16/40-of-wikipedia-is-under-thre.html 40% of Wikipedia is under threat from deletionists] at Boing Boing

{{Wikipedia}}

Category:Criticism of Wikipedia

Category:Digital preservation

Category:Internet censorship

Category:Wikipedia controversies

Category:Wikipedia content