Aaaaall Your Mothers

Recently, it’s come to my attention that the fine author of one of my favorite webcomics, Elf Only Inn – one Josh Sortelli – has encountered some problems with his Wikipedia entry. The one for his webcomic, I mean, that he has no pretense for ownership over whatsoever. It’s being edited and put up for deletion time and time again – and it seems the only thing sparing it is that it’s been nominated for an award or two in its time. As someone who’s had their own run ins with some Dickipedians in my own time I feel like I should at least try and say something. And, well, I know I probably shouldn’t say anything as it’s really not a problem of mine and, really, not something he should be wasting too much time thinking about because it really doesn’t matter but, well, I have to fill space on my blog somehow so I do hope everyone forgives me if I engage in a bit of an old-fashion rant. But his experiences are far from uncommon in the webcomic world. It seems that the Wikipedia has some harsh standards when it comes to including webcomics in their index of, well, everything. Only those that have gotten some outside recognition or are otherwise of “note” are to be spared the daily purge that sees hundreds of pages fall by the wayside. Rather than remain and be worked on until it meets the exacting standards of the rest of the Wikipedia, of course. This is more than a little shocking to me – although by no means a great surprise - as I’ve long held the wiki as one of the greatest inventions that the internet has ever made possible. It’s not even that old and to see it reduced to such petty squabbling is about as depressing as sitting in the front row at the ballet – way too much grunting and sweating going on for something so beautiful.

I’m a little hesitant to begin because, in my legwork on this topic, I encountered the following which, I think, really should make us all pause and reflect. As the man himself says (and I paraphrase), “The ones trying to help are the ones doing the most harm”.

Because that just about says it all right there. What we have here is a culture clash between two sets of people who are both honestly trying their best to help. They’re just trying to help what it is they’ve adopted as their own. Those who’ve taken it upon themselves to police the vast stretches of the world’s largest encyclopedia from vandalism and irrelevance[1] are at odds with, well, fans. Fans specifically of webcomics in general and Mr. Sortelli in particular who only want to share their interest with others in the hopes of encouraging it and tending to it so that it can blossom into something even better still. Neither side has been asked to pour their efforts into their actions[2]. Nor is either side being controlled or directed. It’s a clash of civilizations[3]. Each driven by their own needs and biases and impulses in ways they each probably don’t even realize – because no one really understands just why people do what they do – not to oppose one another, not at first, but to somehow limit the other side. Resentment follows, then conflict, then bitterness. It’s a cycle that’s played out a thousand times before in a thousand different venues in a thousand different ways.

And the sad part is that it doesn’t really need to. The Wikipedia is tottering under the weight of its own success[4]. Simply put, the larger it grows the more rules and regulations it has acquired[5]. And the more people around to enforce those arbitrary standards. The result is an ossification of the creative urges and a consolidation of the rapid expansion that led the Wikipedia to the success it enjoys[6]. It’s just gotten too big for its own good at this point and the flaws in its conception, like weeds within the framework, are starting to bear fruit. It might be possible for the good qualities of the Wikipedia to allow it to gather the resources needed for another wave of expansion to hit. And maybe even for the project to enter into a periodic cycle of expansion and consolidation as it grows and gathers and grows and gathers, I rather doubt it at this point. There are just too many problems with the execution that have gone on for too long and correcting them will prove as costly as ignoring them.

This doesn’t bother me much, though, because while Wikipedia might be destined for the scrap heap itself, it’s not important – not notable – in the grand scheme of things. The idea behind the project, the technology that makes it happen, the information its trying to transmit in its own special way, that’s the important part. And it’s already out there. That’s because the Wikipedia is special but it’s not unique. There are already dozens of other wikis and wiki-like places that are developing. Most wikis concentrate on being niche and cataloging only one specific area of interest like, say, WoWwiki[7] or http://wiki.lspace.org/index.php/Main_Page L-Space. But there are those like, another personal favorite, the Uncyclopedia who are beginning to push the boundaries of what such a device can do. You see, it’s the dedicated, the devoted, the fanatics who tend to be the early adapters of any new idea or machine[8]. They’re the ones who’ll put in their time and effort willingly as they try and build something better, after all. And it’s once their work has made things easier and accessible that any technology passes from the hands of a cloistered few and into the hands of the masses. And that’s when things really start to happen.

The thing is, though, that a wiki even though it’s old by the standards of the internets is still a technology in its infancy. Removing the editor from the equation and inviting the public into the process isn’t exactly a new idea but the method of carrying out is where Wikipedia innovated. But, well, I said I’d been involved in a wiki or two (Or their non-union Mexican equivalent) in my time before and that’s true. I just as quickly became uninvolved because the basic structure is still clunky and arcane. It’s not that I couldn’t learn the various tags and terminology and etiquette required to play in that sandbox it’s that I choose not to. I don’t mean to brag or anything but I’ve been online and active in one way or another since the early 90s (when most people hasn’t even heard of the world wide web) and I’ve encountered dozens of ways of communicating. Back in the day the thing to have was a website but if you wanted one you needed to know html. So I did. Until it turned into dynamic xhtml and I learned that as well. I started with BBSes and I learned how to quote and respond and follow a conversation there. When forums became popular I learned the codes needed to make hyperlinks and fancy colored text there, too. ICQ, AIM, Instant messaging, chat rooms, and dozens of other taught me what’s become l33t speak over the ages, for example, among other things. They’re all languages – and I know more than a few even though I only speak English at the moment – and I’ve learned dozens of them. To edit and participate in a wiki would be to learn yet one more. And one that I don’t really have the time or tolerance to learn right now. If I was desperate or devoted enough to something I might but I still doubt it. That’s because I know that if I wait a few more years, a decade tops, then the ease and accessibility of any wiki will be improved to the point where I - the average user – is going to be able to just sit down and get involved with ease. The first people to adapt will have built the tools and left them laying around for anyone to use[9].

I compare it to the situation with blogs. The last time I looked into getting one it wasn’t all that difficult – as long as you had something to talk about, I suppose – but it also required more than a little bit of knowledge about RSS feeds, and html, and other arcane things if you wanted to have a blog do what I would actually want one to do. Now, not only is signing up even easier than ever, all that technical stuff has faded into the background (on Blogger at least) where it’s still there if you want to tinker with it but it’s invisible to the average reader who doesn’t and isn’t capable of doing to do so. It’s the same reason most cars start with a key ignition these days rather than a hand crank – the technology’s improved the ability of people to make use of it. That makes it much easier for people who aren’t fanatics (or otherwise have a lot of time and effort and monies to burn) to take part. It’s a slow process and it takes time for people to identify the problems and create the fixes but the best part of an agglunative project like a wiki is that it draws on a vast pool of potential resources. All of whom could potential have a tool to bolt onto things that will help someone else down the line.

And, that’s where we came in, of course, because it’s difficult to tell from the current perspective whether a tool is helpful or harmful. I’m sure that the people “running” the wiki[10] have only the best of intentions but in trying to help, to me anyway, they’re causing harm[12]. They’ve created a morass of rules and policies and standard operating procedures that threaten to strangle the whole thing. There’s a noticeable dip in the number of articles that are being created on Wikipedia as well as a noticeable rise in the number of articles being culled. Webcomics are far from alone in this, of course, but they are an especially evangelical corner of the cyber frontier. They want people to read what they read and like what they like – who doesn’t? But that preaching of the good work is what I’d see as the root cause here. The Wikipedia – by which I mean the consensus of all the little busy bees who are constantly creating it – doesn’t really want to be a place where people are going to advertise and otherwise hawk their wares. It just brings up a lot of headaches. So, in order for something to merit entry it not only has to be carefully pruned of any undue fannishness it also has to have made some impact on the world. It has to be, as the wikinauts say, “notable” and that notoriety is best if it comes from someplace other than the dizzying cyber plains. EOI is in the clear because it’s gotten handed an award or two like that before. Others are not. But the unintended consequences of that well-intentioned policy are stupendous. It ignores the fact that just by being entered into a site as large and important as Wikipedia something becomes of note[13]. The mere fact that someone thought enough of something to pluck it from the vast and twisty geographical features of the internet and place it in a permanent public record isn’t cause for concern. Running back to the real world for validation isn’t the solution no matter how important it is to keep commercialism out of a non-profit venture. Not when the world already turns to the internet for its own answers[14].

That the Wikipedia – which at this point is among the first results in any google search – needs some kind of outside validation for anything included in its pages beyond the fact that someone thought it was important enough to add is, I feel a bad, bad sign. And it’s not the only one. But that people are upset with it is a good sign. But even if the Wikipedia empire itself is doomed to collapse like so many others then by creating its own barbarians at the gate, it’s doing more harm than good. It’s just as likely that the next step will come from those people who are dissatisfied with the current system as from within that system. The only certainty is that change will come, eventually. Newer, better structures – within or without – that move the boundaries of wikis not further into specialization but into the mainstream. I mean, look at things like Wetpaint. Things will get cheaper, faster, quicker, better, and easier to use. And that means more and more people are going to be involved and lending their efforts and expertise to the project – the revolution. All revolutions collapse under their own weight into a wave of reactionaries, radicals, and counterrevolutions it’s just the grand weave of history being played out again. But it’s what’s done with the pieces left after someone blows up the old ways that really matters. Either Wikipedia will improve or some other wiki-like structure with better features and greater access will take its place. As soon as they lower the barriers of entry enough for the teaming masses, I’ll be right there among them.

[1] - Which is, of course, a perfectly acceptable and even laudable thing. Not everyone can be an author – someone who tries to add to the world in their own special way. The world needs editors, too.

[2] – Not really. And Mr. Sortelli has shown admirable restraint in keeping the dogs at bay, from my perspective anyway.

[3] - Built up on flimsy hopes and the ephemeral framework of near-instantaneous mass communication.

[4]- That, too, is a cycle that’s played out for as long as humanity has been trying to build up from the dirt and into the heavens.

[5] – Laws tend to accumulate over time. Growing larger not more simple. Always the hallmark of bad design.

[6] – An unintended one, of course, as none of this is being done purposely let alone with malice. It’s just the sum total effect of the efforts of dozens, hundreds, if not thousands of people trying to do their best.

[7] – I honestly don’t know why game companies, especially the ones with online games, continue to publish manuals. Why bother when, given time, the people who play will do a better job – faster and more comprehensive - for free? Just point people to a website or two, slap up a disclaimer that the views represented there don’t necessarily reflect your own and may or may not be accurate, and sit back and watch things develop.

[8] - A wiki is a glorious thing because it’s both at the same time.

[9] – Like rich text editors with embedded spellchecking. Not that I really need one as I have others but it’s much more reassuring to fly with a safety net, so to speak.

[10] – People who’ve devoted their time and spent their efforts into making it what it is each in their own small, special way. They can’t help but feel a connection if not a sense of ownership about what they’ve done. Not as long as they’re human. But being human it’s easy for them to extend that sense of accomplishment beyond what they’ve personally done and place it, somehow, over the entire project. It’s the same beautiful and frightening urge that allows a mother to adopt another’s child as her own. We’re not limited by our family or our genetics or our physical beings. All we need to do is to find something of ourselves, somehow, in something else and we can call it ours.[11]

[11] – Just wanted to holler that I cracked double digits in parentheticals. Word pwnage. wOOt![15]

[12] - And not hurting anything is just the first step to helping.

[13] – It’s pretty hilarious but the problem isn’t that Wikipedia is acting with too much self-importance but that it’s ignoring just how important it really is to the wider community of the internet. The wikinauts have trained themselves to step away from things so they’re really ill-equiped for just how big a battle is brewing over control of that place. Pretty typical of scholarly communities, really.

[14] – And storage space is so cheap when you’re talking about a few bytes of information. Personally, I’d only delete the worst obscenities from Wikipedia and leave everything else laying around to be cleaned up by those behind me. But, then, I have a very high tolerance for the obscene.

[15] - There's a cheap Lord Wootsayediditagyn joke there but I'll refrain.