Wikipedism As Social Movement (WP:ASM), In A Halfway Sane World It'd Backfire, But … Options

[Jon Awbrey]

Sue Gardner's latest rallying cry that poses Wikipedism as a social movement — aside from the fact that it insults everyone from the Hippies of the Sixties and Martin Luther King, Jr. to the CIA, FBI, and the Quakers — doesn't it seem to you that an e-posture like that would be guaranteed to backfire, that is to say, if the world were the least bit sane anymore?

Jon

[tarantino]

Wikipedian \ˌwi-kē-ˈpē-dē-in\ – See Infornographer

[Somey]

...See Infornographer...

Eek, yet another article about a totally manufactured buzzword that never caught on despite having a Wikipedia article about itself which, in turn, never got deleted when it should have become clear that the word wasn't catching on.

Perhaps we should adopt this word as an epithet for Wikipedians and "Wikipedianism" - is that what you're suggesting here, Mr. Tarantino? It might work...

Anyway, I couldn't help thinking that some of what Sue Gardner's blog contains indicates a whole new marketing strategy for WP, emphasizing how "well-established" it is - it's a part of YOUR life! "Everybody likes it!" Imagine how desolate and depressing life would be without it! ...and so on.

And it's definitely not a "social movement" in any realistic sense of the term - I might even go so far as to say it's self-destructive to suggest such a thing.

[Subtle Bee]

Larry Sanger gets the "Slum of all Human Knowledge" dig in as the first comment. Kudos for her not removing it.

Anyway, I couldn't help thinking that some of what Sue Gardner's blog contains indicates a whole new marketing strategy for WP, emphasizing how "well-established" it is - it's a part of YOUR life! "Everybody likes it!" Imagine how desolate and depressing life would be without it! ...and so on.

She's completely deluded.

[...] the FBI attempts to discredit Martin Luther King Jr. by painting him as a womanizer. Or the CIA’s 1967 project Operation CHAOS, designed to monitor the student antiwar movement. Or the FBI’s attempts under COINTELPRO in the late sixties to undermine what it called “black nationalist hate groups” by inciting rivalries among them.

So wikipedia's the new black? It's opposed by shadowy government conspirators?

Marx posits a world in which detractors work against a social movement, and supporters work in favour of it.

That seems simple enough.

At Wikimedia, we’ve had our share of detractors. But I’ve found myself more surprised by the other side — surprised that Wikimedia’s most articulate and passionate supporters –its core editors– don’t do more to promote its success.

Here are some of the things Marx says people can do to support social movements:

■ Work to create a favourable public image for the movement
■ Support participants and help recruit new participants
■ Help with effective communications
■ Support revenue-generating activities
■ Build and sustain participant morale
■ Build and support leaders
■ Encourage internal solidarity: support kindness, understanding, generosity and a sense of common purpose
■ Encourage external solidarity: support the development of common cause between the movement and its potential allies and partners
■ Support movement events and projects.

So basically, it's amway or the highway. Can anyone differentiate this from what people can do to support cult movements?

We don’t want to shill for anybody, including, LOL, ourselves.

lol

And it's definitely not a "social movement" in any realistic sense of the term [....]

True. But as a metaphor for a bunch of constipated, self-congratulating misfits getting together to foul the common information supply, it's pretty spot-on.