Michigan State offers course on WP adminship, should be an easy A if you suck up to the right people Options

[Ego Trippin' (Part Two)]

According to this, Dr. Jonathan Obar, assistant visiting professor in the Michigan State telecommunications department, "is teaching a course this semester on how Wikipedia is governed and how administrators are selected." The students' coursework will be based in part on interviews they will conduct with Wikipedia admins. About 25 admins have already signed up to be interviewed.

A previous thread discussed an article by Obar which sung the praises of using Wikipedia in the classroom. I guess he's progressed from teaching students to use Wikipedia to teaching students about Wikipedia's inner functions. Unfortunately, I suspect that Obar will teach the course with a pro-Wikipedia slant.

I was unable to find a course description on MSU's website. Presumably it's out of date.

What do you think the sourcing standards are like for papers in this novel class? Surely there's not much out there in the way of peer-reviewed literature about Wikipedia's governance.
More to the point, is this the first time you've heard of a college course being taught about Wikipedia's inner workings?

[EricBarbour]

I don't understand why y'all are complaining about Obar on this forum.

Instead, write up a precis that Obar is incompetent/dishonest, and send it to the trustees.
The bullshit with his BLP and other editing practices is actually rather embarrassing, it
doesn't make him look like a good academic. Just write up a blow-by-blow account of
what happened, print out the diffs, and send it in with a cover letter saying that Obar
has been raving about Wikipedia while he's been repeatedly violating Wikipedia's own
regulations (pathetic though they are), and might also be collecting money from the WMF
under the table(difficult to prove, but one never knows). Stand back and see what happens.

[Abd]

I don't understand why y'all are complaining about Obar on this forum.

Ah, so Wikipediotic.

I'm not complaining about Obar, speaking for myself. I'm just pointing out the absurdity of the situation. I can't imagine trying to attack him, to get him fired or the like. Why? Just because he's an idiot?

Or, more accurately, someone a tad out of his depth?

He made some mistakes as an editor, and it looks like he might have benefited from some protection, but so what? I don't see that he went after anyone, trying to get them banned, in favor of a personal agenda. So he's like many or most newbies, simply naive, optimistic, clueless. I don't see "malevolent." Not yet, at least.

What's been remarkable to see in some recent threads is pointers to a change that happened with Heidi Weiss/Gwen Gale. Much of the stuff that mbz1 has been pointing to as examples of how Bad she was actually shows that she understood at least some of the Wikipedia dysfunction, and spoke openly against it, particularly as Heidi. (Which may also be a pseudonym, I haven't seen anything truly definitive, and it's not worth the effort to exhaustively search.).

Give a good editor some power, what happens?

Too often, we know. Power corrupts. It would probably corrupt me, too. Folks, please get this. The Wikipedia Problem isn't due to this or that Bad Person. Wikipedia brings out the worst in people, it's a structural problem, a set-up. It could be fixed, but part of the problem is that the structure creates resistance to the necessary changes. It's like clockwork.

[EricBarbour]

I'm not complaining about Obar, speaking for myself. I'm just pointing out the absurdity of the situation. I can't imagine trying to attack him, to get him fired or the like. Why? Just because he's an idiot?

Or, more accurately, someone a tad out of his depth?

He's a working academic, someone who affixes "professor" to his name, going around and raving about Wikipedia--to his students. Does the MSU management realize that he's propagandizing, on their dollar, a thing that virtually none of their other professors would even say somewhat-positive things about? Remember, I've talked to professional educators, and every one of them has said that Wikipedia is untrustworthy and can't be used for schoolwork. Obar sticks out like the proverbial hammer-smashed sore thumb. Wiki-cheerleaders are extremely deviant in the world of higher education.

If not the MSU trustees, at least his fellow professors should be aware. Although you're right, he's a temporary adjunct, and will very likely be gone next year. Perhaps this is why they're "putting up" with him.

If he wants to use wiki software to demonstrate peer collaboration, he could just put up his own wiki (or, horrors, even use a Wikia wiki) and have his students generate content for it. Then he'd have no problem with deletionist patrollers removing their work. (Which he has, multiple times.)

But no, he's using Wikipedia as if it were a platform for "civic engagement, communication policymaking and the inclusiveness of public culture", which could easily violate that NPOV and COI business that WP nerds are forever abusing people with. Plus, he's been upbraided on WP, for writing his own bio (plus other things). That shows a singular lack of judgement, unless of course he is also conducting a "breaching experiment". (Is he?)

[Fusion]

Wiki-cheerleaders are extremely deviant in the world of higher education.

Is this another dig at Fae?