Wikipedia's coverage of current events blurs the boundaries of what it means to be an encyclopedia. Drawing on Gieyrn's concept of \boundary work", this paper explores how Wikipedia's response to the 9/11 attacks expanded the role of the encyclopedia to include newswork, excluded content like the 9/11 Memorial Wiki that became problematic following this expansion, and legitimized these changes through the adoption of news-related policies and routines like promoting "In the News" content on the homepage. However, a second case exploring WikiNews illustrates the pitfalls of misappropriating professional newswork norms as well as the challenges of sustaining online communities. These cases illuminate the social construction of new technologies as they confront the boundaries of traditional professional identities and also reveal how newswork is changing in response to new forms of organizing enabled by these technologies.

1. A History of Newswork
on Wikipedia"
Brian Keegan, Ph.D. !
@bkeegan!
!
WikiSym 2013!
Hong Kong, China!
August 6, 2013!

2. 2

3. Outline!
• Boundary work"
• September 11th attacks!
• News on the homepage!
• Policies for news content!
• Failure of WikiNews!
• Discussion!
3

4. 4
Encyclopedic ideal versus practice!

5. 5
Material limitations of revising knowledge!

6. 6
Material limitations of revising knowledge!
“Encyclopedias
that served you
well… are now
practically
obsolete”"

7. 7
Material limitations of revising knowledge!
“The man or
woman who
progresses is
keeping abreast
of the times”"

8. 8
Material limitations of revising knowledge!
“Loose-leaf
encyclopedia is
made new every
six months”"

9. 9
Boundary work!
• Strategic action to
differentiate work (Gieryn 1983)!
• Expansion!
• Acquire intellectual authority
over new domain!
• Expulsion!
• Deny resources to non-
conforming agents!
• Exemption!
• Protect domain from incursion
by other agendas!

10. Outline!
• Boundary work!
• September 11th attacks"
• News on the homepage!
• Policies for news content!
• Failure of WikiNews!
• Discussion!
10

11. 11
9/11 on Wikipedia!
• Wikipedia founded
January 2001!
• Grew to ~13,000 articles
in October 2001!
• ~100 articles related to
9/11 topics!
• ~1% of Wikipedia!

12. 12
9/11 Memorial Wiki!

13. Example!
13

14. Example!
14

15. 15
9/11 Memorial Wiki closure!

16. 1616

17. 17
9/11 activity on English Wikipedia!

18. Implications!
• Venue for users with disparate motivations attempting to
document an event of profound historical importance!
• Fickleness of collective interest leads to first shutdown of
Wikimedia Foundation-backed project!
• Cooperation proceeded without agreement about the
boundaries of this new type of practice!
• Replicate “encyclopedic genre” emphasizing neutrality and
objectivity to exclude memorial content?!
• Replicate “journalistic genre” emphasizing memorialization and
sense-making without paper limitations?!
18

19. Outline!
• Boundary work!
• September 11th attacks!
• News on the homepage"
• Policies for news content!
• Failure of WikiNews!
• Discussion!
19

20. 20
Wikipedia homepage, November 2001!
“Develop articles
about important
events as they
happen!”"
“Encyclopedia
articles about
topics behind the
news.”"

21. 21
News on the Homepage, 2002!

22. 22
News on the Homepage, 2012!

23. Boundary work!
• Expansion of encyclopedic genre to prominently
exhibit coverage of breaking news events"
23

24. Outline!
• Boundary work!
• September 11th attacks!
• News on the homepage!
• Policies for news content"
• Failure of WikiNews!
• Discussion!
!
24

25. 25
WP:NOT#NEWS!
“Wikipedia should not offer news reports on
breaking stories. However, creating "encyclopedia"
articles on topics currently in the news is an excellent
idea…However, the Wiki process lends itself to
collaborative, up-to-the minute construction of current
events of historical significance, as long as these are
written as encyclopedia articles.”
Toby Bartels, 2002
“As Wikipedia is not a paper source, editors are
encouraged to include current and up-to-date in-
formation within its coverage, and the development of
stand-alone articles on significant current events.
However, not all verifiable events are suitable for
inclusion in Wikipedia. Ensure that Wikipedia articles
are not:
1. Journalism. Wikipedia should not offer first-hand
news reports on breaking stories. ...Wikipedia does
have many encyclopedia articles on topics of historical
significance that are currently in the news, and can be
updated with recently verified information. Wikipedia is
also not written in news style.
2. News reports. Wikipedia considers the enduring
notability of persons and events. While news coverage
can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics,
most newsworthy events do not qualify for
inclusion. ...While including information on recent
developments is sometimes appropriate, breaking
news should not be emphasized or otherwise treated
differently from other information."
2013

26. 26
WP:EVENT!
“It is wise to delay writing an article about a breaking news event until the
significance of the event is clearer as early coverage may lack
perspective and be subject to factual errors.
...However, articles about widely reported major unexpected or
unprecedented events such as the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake, the
Assassination of Benazir Bhutto or the Death of Michael Jackson will almost
certainly gain consensus to be kept even when created on the same day as the
event occurred.
...Editors are encouraged to write about breaking news events in Wikinews
instead of in Wikipedia”

27. 27
WP:EVENT!
1. Lasting effects. An event that is a precedent
or catalyst for something else of lasting
significance is likely to be notable.
2. Geographical scope. Notable events usually
have significant impact over a wide region,
domain, or widespread societal group.
3. Depth of coverage. An event must receive
significant or in-depth coverage to be notable.
4. Duration of coverage. Notable events
usually receive coverage beyond a relatively
short news cycle.
5. Diversity of sources. Significant national
or international coverage is usually expected
for an event to be notable. Wide-ranging re-
porting tends to show significance, but sources
that simply mirror or tend to follow other
sources, or are under common control with
other sources, are usually discounted.

28. Boundary work!
• Expansion of encyclopedic genre to prominently
exhibit coverage of breaking news events"
"
• Exclusion of some types of news content through
emulation of broader journalistic news values"
28

29. Outline!
• Boundary work!
• September 11th attacks!
• News on the homepage!
• Policies for news content!
• Failure of WikiNews"
• Discussion!
29

30. WikiNews!
• Use “news” rather than
“encyclopedia” style!
• Original reporting rather than
“verifiability” and “no original
research”!
• Staged publication process "
• Development"
• Reviewer evaluation"
• Promotion to front page"
• Archival"
30

31. Emulation of faltering norms!
31

32. 32
Comparison of models!
Wikipedia"
• Optional vetting!
• No deadline!
• Single authoritative page!
• Links to contextual info!
• Differentiate from printed
encyclopedia norms!
WikiNews"
• Formal review!
• Publication & archival!
• Multiple parallel pages!
• Off-project contextual links!
• Differentiate from
Wikipedia norms!

33. 33
Failure of WikiNews!
33
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Normalized
count
(November
2004
=
100)
New
Wikipedians
New
Wikireporters
Wikipedians,
edits
>5
Wikireporters,
edits
>5

34. “…a new pattern of [news] consumption was validated in the
confusing minutes that followed the first reports of [Michael Jackson’s
death]: users shared; they searched and they clicked on Wikipedia. …
The new routine of Twitter-to-Google-to-Wikipedia contrasts sharply
with the behavior of users [after Princess Diana’s death]. …the key to
Wikipedia’s success is that its pages are designed to catch traffic,
provide key information and then send users on their way to deeper
engagement on the subjects they’re interested in. …for large portions
of the Internet audience, [Wikipedia was] an authoritative source
working to verify an important news development.” !
- Associated Press internal memo, 2009!
34
“…how [might] the authoritativeness of news articles grow if an evolving
story were published under a permanent, single URL as a living,
changing, updating entity?”
- Marissa Meyer

35. Boundary work!
• Expansion of encyclopedic genre to prominently
exhibit coverage of breaking news events"
"
• Exclusion of some types of news content through
emulation of journalistic news values"
• Exemption of Wikipedia’s news approach from
failures of traditional journalism model"
35

36. Outline!
• Boundary work!
• September 11th attacks!
• News on the homepage!
• Policies for news content!
• Failure of WikiNews!
• Discussion"
36

37. Discussion!
• Re-appraisal of
encyclopedic identity in light
of new technologies!
• Expansion introduced
anomalies and residual
categories!
• Exclusion of alternative
interpretations by
institutionalization!
• Exemption from prevailing
journalistic norms !
37
“...all information systems are
necessarily suffused with ethical
and political values, modulated by
local administrative procedures.
These systems are active creators
of categories in the world as well as
simulators of existing categories.”
- Bowker & Star, 2000

38. Implications!
• Ephemerality of collection attention and durability of peer
production systems – Loss of 9/11 Memorial Wiki!
• Documenting new events of profound historical importance
advances interests of some parties and perspectives over
others’ – Adoption of news policies!
• Socially constructed project identities enable and constrain
opportunities for contribution – Failure of WikiNews!
• Major shift in expectations around timeliness of knowledge
as well as structures for producing content disrupting
traditional professional identities!
38

39. 39
THANK YOU!"
Brian Keegan"
b.keegan@neu.edu!
www.brianckeegan.com!
@bkeegan!
39
Special thanks to Benjamin Mako Hill, Dariusz
Jemielniak, Jeff Loveland, Joe Reagle, Justin
Reich, Aaron Shaw, Denis Tenen for their
feedback on earlier drafts of this paper.