Changes

<table style="float: left; text-align: left; height: 190px;" border="0" width="160">

<table style="float: left; text-align: left; height: 190px;" border="0" width="160  

<tr>

<tr>

<td>http://akahele.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/kirilove2-150x150.jpg</td>

<td>http://akahele.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/kirilove2-150x150.jpg</td>

</tr>

</tr>

<tr>

<tr>

<td class="photocaption" style="text-align: left;">Performance Artist Vic Kirilove and his Journal-de-Boörd project.</td>

<td class="photocaption" style="text-align: left; Performance Artist Vic Kirilove and his Journal-de-Boörd project.</td>

</tr>

</tr>

</table>

</table>

As his website states: ''Vic Kirilove capte les circonstances de l’échange où se mettent en place les structures de vérité.'' (Vic Kirilove captures the circumstances of the exchange in which the structures of truth are put into place.)

As his website states: ''Vic Kirilove capte les circonstances de l’échange où se mettent en place les structures de vérité.'' (Vic Kirilove captures the circumstances of the exchange in which the structures of truth are put into place.)

<table style="float: left; text-align: right;" border="0" width="150">

<table style="float: left; text-align: right;" border="0" width="150  

<tr>

<tr>

<td>http://akahele.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/insitu5-150x150.jpg</td>

<td>http://akahele.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/insitu5-150x150.jpg</td>

</tr>

</tr>

<tr>

<tr>

<td class="photocaption" style="text-align: left;">A Kirilove performance.</td>

<td class="photocaption" style="text-align: left; A Kirilove performance.</td>

</tr>

</tr>

</table>

</table>

==Wikipedia's core policies and creativity==

==Wikipedia's core policies and creativity==

<table style="float: left; text-align: left;" border="0" width="150">

<table style="float: left; text-align: left;" border="0" width="150  

<tr>

<tr>

<td>http://akahele.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/250px-comcast2alr-150x150.jpg</td>

<td>http://akahele.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/250px-comcast2alr-150x150.jpg</td>

</tr>

</tr>

<tr>

<tr>

<td class="photocaption">A photo can also be a violation of the "No original research" policy.</td>

<td class="photocaption A photo can also be a violation of the "No original research" policy.</td>

</tr>

</tr>

</table>

</table>

==Wikipedia...Art?==

==Wikipedia...Art?==

<table style="float: right; text-align: left;" border="0" width="150">

<table style="float: right; text-align: left;" border="0" width="150  

<tr>

<tr>

<td>http://akahele.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/180px-wikipedia_art-copy-150x150.jpg</td>

<td>http://akahele.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/180px-wikipedia_art-copy-150x150.jpg</td>

</tr>

</tr>

<tr>

<tr>

<td class="photocaption">the official logo of the Wikipedia Art project.</td>

<td class="photocaption the official logo of the Wikipedia Art project.</td>

</tr>

</tr>

</table>

</table>

On February 14, 2009, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Kildall Scott Kildall] and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathaniel_Stern">Nathaniel Stern</a> created ''Wikipedia Art'' by posting <a href="http://wikipediaart.org/wiki/index.php?title=Wikipedia_Art&oldid=211">an article of the same name</a> on Wikipedia.  ''Wikipedia Art'' was defined as :

On February 14, 2009, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Kildall Scott Kildall] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathaniel_Stern Nathaniel Stern] created ''Wikipedia Art'' by posting [http://wikipediaart.org/wiki/index.php?title=Wikipedia_Art&oldid=211 an article of the same name] on Wikipedia.  ''Wikipedia Art'' was defined as :

''"an  art intervention which explicitly invites  performative utterances in order to change the work itself. The ongoing composition and performance of Wikipedia Art is intended to point to the 'invisible authors and authorities' of Wikipedia, and by extension the Internet,[2] as well as the site's extant criticisms:  bias,  consensus over  credentials, reliability and accuracy, vandalism, etc... like knowledge and like art, Wikipedia Art is always already variable.

''"an  art intervention which explicitly invites  performative utterances in order to change the work itself. The ongoing composition and performance of Wikipedia Art is intended to point to the 'invisible authors and authorities' of Wikipedia, and by extension the Internet,[2] as well as the site's extant criticisms:  bias,  consensus over  credentials, reliability and accuracy, vandalism, etc... like knowledge and like art, Wikipedia Art is always already variable.

The project is 'similar to <a href="http://andrewkeen.typepad.com/">Andrew Keen's</a> complaints of Wikipedia as being an unreasonable request upon internet society to create cultural foundations (encyclopedias, art media, etc) without compensation, thus devaluing production."''

The project is 'similar to [http://andrewkeen.typepad.com/ Andrew Keen's] complaints of Wikipedia as being an unreasonable request upon internet society to create cultural foundations (encyclopedias, art media, etc) without compensation, thus devaluing production."''

The Wikipedia Art project manifesto uses obvious cues to express that it will attempt to follow Wikipedia core polices, yet makes the probably fatal error of naming Andrew Keen, who is seen as a key Wikipedia opponent.  The authors are clearly using Wikipedia as a reference, reflecting the bureaucratic structure and highly ritualized practices back to the very society that has created them.  How could we expect this Society to react to this mirror image?

The Wikipedia Art project manifesto uses obvious cues to express that it will attempt to follow Wikipedia core polices, yet makes the probably fatal error of naming Andrew Keen, who is seen as a key Wikipedia opponent.  The authors are clearly using Wikipedia as a reference, reflecting the bureaucratic structure and highly ritualized practices back to the very society that has created them.  How could we expect this Society to react to this mirror image?

The reaction was like oil and water, with discussion taking place immediately on several areas within Wikipedia itself. The Wikipedia Art article lasted for fifteen hours until it was removed from Wikipedia through <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Wikipedia_Art">Wikipedia's deletion process</a> and generated <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28miscellaneous%29&amp;oldid=271062016#Help._I_have_created_a_monster.21">an extremely long discussion</a> on Wikipedia's ''Village Pump'' page.  In the middle of the ''exceedingly polite discussion'' as to whether or not this article should be kept, there is another much more burning question which is only fleetingly touched upon in certain comments: ''Are we being had?'' In other words, is this serious or is this a big joke? Or, to put it another way, ''what is the intent?'' Werdna, the user name of the administrator who closed this debate seems to make a judgment in his comments on the Village Pump :

The reaction was like oil and water, with discussion taking place immediately on several areas within Wikipedia itself. The Wikipedia Art article lasted for fifteen hours until it was removed from Wikipedia through [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Wikipedia_Art Wikipedia's deletion process] and generated [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28miscellaneous%29&amp;oldid=271062016#Help._I_have_created_a_monster.21 an extremely long discussion] on Wikipedia's ''Village Pump'' page.  In the middle of the ''exceedingly polite discussion'' as to whether or not this article should be kept, there is another much more burning question which is only fleetingly touched upon in certain comments: ''Are we being had?'' In other words, is this serious or is this a big joke? Or, to put it another way, ''what is the intent?'' Werdna, the user name of the administrator who closed this debate seems to make a judgment in his comments on the Village Pump :

''I ended the circus as a routine A7. — Werdna • talk 06:37, 15 February 2009 (UTC)''

''I ended the circus as a routine A7. — Werdna • talk 06:37, 15 February 2009 (UTC)''

Note the disparaging remark, and the return to normalcy via the Wikipedia-specific alphanumeric jargon. ''Those art trolls aren't going to pull the wool over our eyes!  No sir! '' Unfortunately for him, Werdna <a href="http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/vlog/ScenesOfProvincialLife.cgi/2009/02/15#post298">discovered too late the perils of confronting the Art World</a> head on! (A history of the project from the point of view of the artists is available <a href="http://wikipediaart.org/brief-history/">here</a>).

Note the disparaging remark, and the return to normalcy via the Wikipedia-specific alphanumeric jargon. ''Those art trolls aren't going to pull the wool over our eyes!  No sir! '' Unfortunately for him, Werdna [http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/vlog/ScenesOfProvincialLife.cgi/2009/02/15#post298 discovered too late the perils of confronting the Art World] head on! (A history of the project from the point of view of the artists is available [http://wikipediaart.org/brief-history/ here]).

<strong>The end product of the conflict: Vandalism</strong>

<strong>The end product of the conflict: Vandalism</strong>

Around the same time the Wikipedia Art project was going on, police in Stockholm, Sweden were <a href="http://www.thelocal.se/17660/20090218/">investigating the case</a> of an art student who had filmed the vandalism of a subway train as part of his final project for Art School.  Another student <a href="http://www.thelocal.se/17268/20090130/">pretended to be be psychotic</a> and went as far as arranging to be committed to a psychiatric hospital.

Around the same time the Wikipedia Art project was going on, police in Stockholm, Sweden were [http://www.thelocal.se/17660/20090218/ investigating the case] of an art student who had filmed the vandalism of a subway train as part of his final project for Art School.  Another student [http://www.thelocal.se/17268/20090130/ pretended to be be psychotic] and went as far as arranging to be committed to a psychiatric hospital.

The artist who seeks to express his views of society to generate a reaction may resort to many strategies, which may include <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SlimVirgin/Poetgate">role-playing</a>, <a href="http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=18309">vandalism </a> or ideas which are merely <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Shii/Hoaxes&amp;oldid=276937327">creations of the fertile imagination of the Artist</a>. Of course, many non-artists also use these same strategies for other aims.  The question is: how does one tell who is an artist and who is a psychotic, especially in an environment where just about everyone is a pseudonym to begin with?

The artist who seeks to express his views of society to generate a reaction may resort to many strategies, which may include [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SlimVirgin/Poetgate role-playing], [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=18309 vandalism ] or ideas which are merely [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Shii/Hoaxes&amp;oldid=276937327 creations of the fertile imagination of the Artist]. Of course, many non-artists also use these same strategies for other aims.  The question is: how does one tell who is an artist and who is a psychotic, especially in an environment where just about everyone is a pseudonym to begin with?

<strong>Wiki-projections and the question of intent</strong>

<strong>Wiki-projections and the question of intent</strong>

The answer is: ''you can't'', unless you can know the intent of the person involved. In the Web 2.0 world, where pseudonyms are the rule rather than the exception, you can't know the intent of the person making a given statement, but you can make guesses as to what you think the person might be implying. These types of projections, especially in text-only settings where vocal and facial cues are absent, often lead to conclusions which have more to say about the people making the judgment rather than the speaker.

The answer is: ''you can't'', unless you can know the intent of the person involved. In the Web 2.0 world, where pseudonyms are the rule rather than the exception, you can't know the intent of the person making a given statement, but you can make guesses as to what you think the person might be implying. These types of projections, especially in text-only settings where vocal and facial cues are absent, often lead to conclusions which have more to say about the people making the judgment rather than the speaker.

For example, in <a href="http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=23304">this thread on the Wikipedia Review</a> which discusses an article entitled <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strip_search_prank_call_scam">The Strip Search Prank Call Scam</a>, participants made judgments about the principals in the story based on their personal feelings about the incident, rather than by using the sources or the evidence.  Clearly, a great deal of projection as to the intent of the people involved was being generated.

For example, in [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=23304 this thread on the Wikipedia Review] which discusses an article entitled [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strip_search_prank_call_scam The Strip Search Prank Call Scam], participants made judgments about the principals in the story based on their personal feelings about the incident, rather than by using the sources or the evidence.  Clearly, a great deal of projection as to the intent of the people involved was being generated.

This type of emotional judgment of intent is typical of the core group of Wikipedia editors, with all people outside of their behavioral expectations being labeled with the same generic term: <strong>Troll</strong>.

This type of emotional judgment of intent is typical of the core group of Wikipedia editors, with all people outside of their behavioral expectations being labeled with the same generic term: <strong>Troll</strong>.

<strong>Positive Trolling for the greater good of Mankind</strong>

<strong>Positive Trolling for the greater good of Mankind</strong>

<table style="float: left; text-align: left;" border="0" width="150">

<table style="float: left; text-align: left;" border="0" width="150  

<tbody>

<tbody>

<tr>

<tr>

</tr>

</tr>

<tr>

<tr>

<td class="photocaption">A troll and his electric knife.</td>

<td class="photocaption A troll and his electric knife.</td>

</tr>

</tr>

</tbody></table>

</tbody></table>

People who are seen as ''trolls'' by those in power at Wikipedia are often those who are simply pointing out flaws in the way Wikipedia works, or rather in the way it doesn't work.  To give one famous example, for quite a while <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Electric_knife&amp;oldid=168689419">the Wikipedia article for ''Electric knife''</a> contained the following text :

People who are seen as ''trolls'' by those in power at Wikipedia are often those who are simply pointing out flaws in the way Wikipedia works, or rather in the way it doesn't work.  To give one famous example, for quite a while [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Electric_knife&amp;oldid=168689419 the Wikipedia article for ''Electric knife''] contained the following text :

QUOTE (Wikipedia, "Electric knife" @ 12/10/07)

QUOTE (Wikipedia, "Electric knife" @ 12/10/07)

<strong>They are also sometimes used for other purposes, such as shaping polyurethane foam rubber to make <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hip_and_buttock_padding&amp;oldid=161678268">hip and buttock padding</a></strong>.

<strong>They are also sometimes used for other purposes, such as shaping polyurethane foam rubber to make [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hip_and_buttock_padding&amp;oldid=161678268 hip and buttock padding]</strong>.

Because this particular use of the electric knife was difficult to source and sounded rather odd, a "thoughtful" editor added <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Electric_knife&amp;diff=next&amp;oldid=177138881">another use for electric knives</a> which was easier to source. This was seen as ''trolling'' by other Wikipedia editors, but it did serve to point out that the other information about padding was perhaps not necessary for a general-purpose encyclopedia.  While one cannot know whether or not this edit was "artistic", the effect of the edit itself served to underline the true motivations of the initial editor, bringing into light the existence of a hidden agenda.  In this sense, it may be seen as an artistic action, whether or not an artistic intent was indeed present, as the result was a reaction from both participants and <a href="http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=14505">spectators</a>.

Because this particular use of the electric knife was difficult to source and sounded rather odd, a "thoughtful" editor added [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Electric_knife&amp;diff=next&amp;oldid=177138881 another use for electric knives] which was easier to source. This was seen as ''trolling'' by other Wikipedia editors, but it did serve to point out that the other information about padding was perhaps not necessary for a general-purpose encyclopedia.  While one cannot know whether or not this edit was "artistic", the effect of the edit itself served to underline the true motivations of the initial editor, bringing into light the existence of a hidden agenda.  In this sense, it may be seen as an artistic action, whether or not an artistic intent was indeed present, as the result was a reaction from both participants and [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=14505 spectators].

The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wet_floor_sign&amp;oldid=210932395">original incarnation of the "Wet Floor sign" article</a> is perhaps my favorite example of possibly artistic Wikipedia vandalism, underlining many major faults of Wikipedia practice, the foremost of which is taking everything  much too seriously.  The last paragraph is particularly stunning in its pretentious and vapid tone :

The [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wet_floor_sign&amp;oldid=210932395 original incarnation of the "Wet Floor sign" article] is perhaps my favorite example of possibly artistic Wikipedia vandalism, underlining many major faults of Wikipedia practice, the foremost of which is taking everything  much too seriously.  The last paragraph is particularly stunning in its pretentious and vapid tone :

''There is currently a debate within the intelligentsia and within the population as a whole concerning the worthiness of treating the 'wet-floor sign' as a subject of inquiry, independent of the more general topic of 'signs.' On the one side are those scholars such as the present writer, who view each and every type of sign as a unique contribution to civilization's wealth and security, just as each individual human is perfectly independent of others and is endowed with certain unalienable rights: rights held by the individual, not the collective. These scholars understand the incredible value of a wet-floor sign. A wet-floor sign warns. It teaches. It promotes bilingualism. It enhances the aesthetics of an environment. It prevents injury. It is yellow and has a man falling down on it. On the other side of the debate are those who wish to censor; those who wish to label; those who wish to limit the debate; those who wish limit expression of a person's, an object's individual characteristics. They argue that by knowing what a 'sign' is, we obviously know what a 'wet-floor sign' is. They argue that there is no difference between a sign that proclaims "WET FLOOR" and a sign that proclaims "START LINE HERE." They argue that it is unnecessary to specialize one's knowledge, to understand uniqueness, to consider the small things around us. They argue that 'a sign is a sign, no matter what it says.' This debate continues, and its conclusion will determine humanity's intellectual future.''

''There is currently a debate within the intelligentsia and within the population as a whole concerning the worthiness of treating the 'wet-floor sign' as a subject of inquiry, independent of the more general topic of 'signs.' On the one side are those scholars such as the present writer, who view each and every type of sign as a unique contribution to civilization's wealth and security, just as each individual human is perfectly independent of others and is endowed with certain unalienable rights: rights held by the individual, not the collective. These scholars understand the incredible value of a wet-floor sign. A wet-floor sign warns. It teaches. It promotes bilingualism. It enhances the aesthetics of an environment. It prevents injury. It is yellow and has a man falling down on it. On the other side of the debate are those who wish to censor; those who wish to label; those who wish to limit the debate; those who wish limit expression of a person's, an object's individual characteristics. They argue that by knowing what a 'sign' is, we obviously know what a 'wet-floor sign' is. They argue that there is no difference between a sign that proclaims "WET FLOOR" and a sign that proclaims "START LINE HERE." They argue that it is unnecessary to specialize one's knowledge, to understand uniqueness, to consider the small things around us. They argue that 'a sign is a sign, no matter what it says.' This debate continues, and its conclusion will determine humanity's intellectual future.''

<table style="float: right; text-align: center;" border="0" width="199">

<table style="float: right; text-align: center;" border="0" width="199  

<tbody>

<tbody>

<tr>

<tr>

</tr>

</tr>

<tr>

<tr>

<td class="photocaption" style="text-align: left;">Lady Catherine Augusta Amelia Gladys de Burgh was a candidate for the ArbCom elections in 2008, until her sudden "death".</td>

<td class="photocaption" style="text-align: left; Lady Catherine Augusta Amelia Gladys de Burgh was a candidate for the ArbCom elections in 2008, until her sudden "death".</td>

</tr>

</tr>

</tbody></table>

</tbody></table>

Although the author of this gem is unknown,  I have always suspected <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Giano_II">User: Giano</a> whose beautifully written prose articles and wonderfully dry sense of humor shine like gems amongst the rest of the ''dreck'' which passes for writing on Wikipedia.  He certainly knows <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Catherine_de_Burgh/Catherine_Bonkbuster">how to push buttons</a> without getting indefinitely banned, in spite of being seen as a troll almost universally among the higher cabals of Wikipedia.  Giano's greatest achievement was creating the character Lady Catherine de Burgh, whose <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2008/Candidate_statements/Catherine_de_Burgh/Questions_for_the_candidate">bid to be elected</a> to Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee was stopped short by her very untimely death, although not before making some very arch statements:

Although the author of this gem is unknown,  I have always suspected [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Giano_II User: Giano] whose beautifully written prose articles and wonderfully dry sense of humor shine like gems amongst the rest of the ''dreck'' which passes for writing on Wikipedia.  He certainly knows [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Catherine_de_Burgh/Catherine_Bonkbuster how to push buttons] without getting indefinitely banned, in spite of being seen as a troll almost universally among the higher cabals of Wikipedia.  Giano's greatest achievement was creating the character Lady Catherine de Burgh, whose [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2008/Candidate_statements/Catherine_de_Burgh/Questions_for_the_candidate bid to be elected] to Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee was stopped short by her very untimely death, although not before making some very arch statements:

''"Rumour is a very dangerous thing, just imagine if we were all to listen to every Wikipedia rumour and whisper. Goodness gracious one would believe every Arb and check-user were the mistress/lover of the other - or worse! - perish the thought. The only blackberries I have dear are in a crumble. The Arbcom is quite safe in my hands. Catherine de Burgh (Lady) (talk) 22:46, 17 November 2008 (UTC)"''

''"Rumour is a very dangerous thing, just imagine if we were all to listen to every Wikipedia rumour and whisper. Goodness gracious one would believe every Arb and check-user were the mistress/lover of the other - or worse! - perish the thought. The only blackberries I have dear are in a crumble. The Arbcom is quite safe in my hands. Catherine de Burgh (Lady) (talk) 22:46, 17 November 2008 (UTC)"''

<h4>Image credits:</h4>

<h4>Image credits:</h4>

     <li><span style="color: #000000;">Vic Kirilove photos, © Vic Kirilove, all rights reserved,  used with permission <a title="©" href="http://www.kirilove.com" target="_blank"><span class="comment">kirilove.com</span></a>.</span></li>

     <li><span style="color: #000000; Vic Kirilove photos, © Vic Kirilove, all rights reserved,  used with permission <a title="©" href="http://www.kirilove.com" target="_blank <span class="comment kirilove.com</span>].</span></li>

     <li><span style="color: #000000;">Comcast Center,  <a title="CC" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Comcast2aLR.jpg" target="_blank"><span class="comment">photo by User:    Photodavid</span></a>.</span></li>

     <li><span style="color: #000000; Comcast Center,  <a title="CC" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Comcast2aLR.jpg" target="_blank <span class="comment photo by User:    Photodavid</span>].</span></li>

     <li><span style="color: #000000;">Troll and Electric Knife, © by Gregory Kohs, <a title="©" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/thekohser/" target="_blank"><span class="comment">all rights reserved, used with permission</span></a>.</span></li>

     <li><span style="color: #000000; Troll and Electric Knife, © by Gregory Kohs, <a title="©" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/thekohser/" target="_blank <span class="comment all rights reserved, used with permission</span>].</span></li>

     <li><span style="color: #000000;">Wikipedia Art logo, <a title="GNU" href="http://wikipediaart.org/wiki/index.php?title=Image:Wikipedia_Art.png" target="_blank"><span class="comment">GNU Free Documentation License 1.2</span></a>.</span></li>

     <li><span style="color: #000000; Wikipedia Art logo, <a title="GNU" href="http://wikipediaart.org/wiki/index.php?title=Image:Wikipedia_Art.png" target="_blank <span class="comment GNU Free Documentation License 1.2</span>].</span></li>

==Comments==

==Comments==