|
Popular Keywords: old books, old book, cook books, poetry, find books, travel books, book search, bargain books, cheap books, inexpensive books, book compare, book comparison, comics, books and collectibles book, books, new books, new book, used books, used book, rare books, rare book, second hand books, second hand book, out of print books, out of print book, textbooks, used textbooks, cheap textbooks, college textbooks
Community
Is wikipedia really a community? Why or why not? State your views here:
- No! We're a family! Like The Tallini Family. But with more beards! -- Tarquin
Before I thought a community could be built because people were sharing a vision, some ideals (building a free encyclopedia together). But though I share things with my wikipedian fellows, though I (sometimes) appreciate them much, it is not a community. A community goes beyond the simple sharing of a simplified vision. Maybe is that more a moral issue then. And clearly, many among us don't share some values I consider essential to my well-being and peace of mind. Or�likely, quite a bunch of us could share it, if we took time to think about it.
Tarquin is quite right here. From my own definition, it is more a family than a community. We don't choose a family, we belong to it.

In biology, a community is a group of species living together, strongly inter-related. Ie, mostly benefits, but also, some disadvantages for some of the species, as long as the whole community benefit from it and is in a stable equilibrium. It is not about risk first, it is about equilibrium, each species regulating itself thanks to and through the others. Untip it, and the whole community breaks up. And the most diverse the community, the more stable it is.
Maybe is it a semantic question, and we don't all have the same definition of what a community is ?
Can the Wikipedia community become a Wikimedia community?













