This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Public sphere is within the scope of WikiProject Open, a collaborative attempt at improving Wikimedia content with the help of openly licensed materials and improving Wikipedia articles related to openness (including open access publishing, open educational resources, etc.). If you would like to participate, visit the project page for more information.
Internet, social media and the public sphere
Coffeepusher deleted the entire new section "Internet, social media and the public sphere", commenting "Origional research, reads like the intro and conclusion of a original paper regarding the Habermas Twitter account". The Internet undoubtedly plays an important role for the public sphere. The public sphere article had thus far not taken notice of this circumstance. The Internet section tries to document what Habermas and other scholars say about the public sphere. The emergence of a Fake-Habermas account on Twitter is something that Habermas found concerning and on which he commented. All passages in the Twitter-paragraph are referenced. I agree that the part "The example shows that social media pose a lot of questions about the public sphere in terms of authenticity of the speaker, anonymity in cyberspace, if meaningful political conversations are possible in 140 characters, etc." is not referenced and can therefore sound like original research. I therefore deleted this sentence. But I think the other information about the Twitter account is crucial factual information and should therefore stay. Also the rest is a documentation of others' research, not original research. Coffeepusher, if you want to help, then please contribute to improving writing the Internet, social media and public sphere-section of the article by making suggestions and drafting and discussing paragraphs as well as revisions for paragraphs. --Fuchschristian (talk) 06:34, 15 February 2014
Thank you for the explanation Fuchschristian. The format itself gives it away as a copy/paste from a research paper. It starts with a quote from Habermas to establish the argument, moves on to a case study (Habermas twitter account), and ends with "future research" which is something that is only used in conclusions for academic papers. As of now I am unable to find any articles which tie together net-public sphere, Habermas's twitter account, and the work by Dahlberg, which is what makes this section original research. Even if we delete the intro and case study, Dahlberg's paper violates weight, meaning that this article is being unfairly represented based on its current influence alongside other more notable studies (when you take into account impact on the field and amount of space this section takes up). Why did we choose to highlight this article, which was cited by 40 rather than Bohman with 223 (both published same year) or Fraser's article on internet public sphere who, while her article itself isn't as impact personally has a much larger impact in public sphere research. I see that you are a new user, I have given you a "welcome" template on your user talk page. If you have any questions about wikipedia's policies and how to navigate the various subsections of wikipedia please feel free to contact me. Cheers! Coffeepusher (talk) 15:16, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
So it appears that there is a coordinated effort from the University of Westminster to work on an internet and the public sphere. Unfortunately these efforts consist of a new user making 2-4 edits and then disappearing only for another new user to appear, none of them interacting on the talk page, and none of them contributing elsewhere on wikipedia. Because of this behavior I suspect that this is some kind of a class project. The problem with all of these edits is that they are taking the form of article summaries rather than addressing the issue of public sphere and the internet. This is an encyclopedia, and an encyclopedia wouldn't consist of article summaries of the specifics of each article unless, like the Habermas-Fraser-Hauser sections, those articles founded entire areas of research. If we want to have this section and make it an encyclopedic then why don't we list out the common themes which are addressed in internet and public sphere research. Cheers! Coffeepusher (talk) 14:25, 19 February 2014 (UTC)