Talk:Online community

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

history doesn't go back very far[edit]

The history starts more or less with: "Some of the earliest forms of online community websites included (1994), GeoCities (1994), and (1995)"? What about Usenet (1980), PLATO (1973), or BBSs? --Delirium (talk) 01:44, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Life cycle section discussion[edit]

I am what the article considers a "lurker", yet this is not a circumstance I see I must "proceed forward" from. I am happy with my position relative to this community.

"outbound" also doesn't always happen that way, nor is it always so "pretty". often times the changes are not in the outbound person as implied, they are instead in the organization. Other times, "outbound" is not voluntary. people have been pushed out of most communities in cyberspace.

this is all very much an "idealized" view, more of what is expected to happen as opposed to reality; the corporate view as opposed to what actually happens. (talk) 19:40, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

-- I would have to agree with your understanding of the title lurker. Each person within the life cycle or ecosystem has a level of need that must be present for a user to move beyond their current role. Look at Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs as a good base of backing. Also there are two different kinds of lurkers as well. One active and one passive. Thejournalizer (talk) 19:45, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Newcomers in online communities[edit]

Hi all, First, I changed this discussion section's title into "life cycle section discussion", so that other people have questions regarding to this topic can also fit in.

Second, I am going to add a new section under the "life cycle" part and I am going to talk about the "newcomers in online communities" which I think is really important for online community studies.

For the section I am going to add, I will first from the newcomers' perspective talk about the barriers faced by them when entering the online communities. I will use paper "A systematic literature review on the barriers faced by newcomers to open source software projects" as my main resource.

I will then mainly talk about from the communities side that the challenges and design suggestions when dealing with newcomers. I will use the framework from the book "Building Successful Online Communities" chapter 5: "The challenges of Dealing with Newcomers" to summarize the 5 challenges and design suggestions made in the book.

Thanks, and let me know if you have any other suggestions.

Reference 1: Igor Steinmacher, Marco Aurelio Graciotto Silva, Marco Aurelio Gerosa, David F. Redmiles, A systematic literature review on the barriers faced by newcomers to open source software projects, Information and Software Technology, Volume 59, March 2015, Pages 67-85, ISSN 0950-5849,

Reference 2: Robert E. Kraut, Paul Resnick, Sara Kiesler, Yuqing Ren, Yan Chen, Moira Burke, Niki Kittur, John Riedl, and Joseph Konstan. 2012. Building Successful Online Communities: Evidence-Based Social Design. The MIT Press.

---Ang li (talk) 20:05, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

way to see total page views for "online community" ?[edit]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

i want to see the total page views for "online community" article.. right now, i can see views at the link below, but only in 90 day durations and only by months. I am hoping to find the total views between January 11, 2010, and now. (This is for a research project involving Wikipedia and how Wikipedians define "online community")

thank you very much!!

Mollygk (talk) 05:09, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

As I said on -en-help, the answer is 197858. :) Legoktm (talk) 05:44, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Legoktm! I posted this before I went into the help chat, and I really appreciate your calculations :) Mollygk (talk) 07:10, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

How about some images?[edit]

Some skillfully-placed diagrams, figures, or appropriate representative photographs (i.e. not just the logo of someone's favorite website), would help improve the look of this article. --Animalparty-- (talk) 23:24, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Removed selfpub/poorly-cited section[edit]

I removed the "Lack of real-world social interactions" section in its entirety. It was originally added in a spate of WP:SELFPUB/spam referencing in 2012 - for detailed notes, see This section appears to have been edited since then, and contains a huge string of uncited or poorly cited facts and no credible references. If this section is of great interest to someone, please fix at least some of the fact/clarifaction tags, and include credible references, before reverting. X14n (talk) 22:34, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Dr. Robert E. Kraut's comment on this article[edit]

Dr. Robert E. Kraut has recently published the following research publications which are related to this Wikipedia article:

  • Reference 1: Zhu, Haiyi, R. E. Kraut, and Aniket Kittur. "Doing What Needs To Be Done: Effects of Goals in Self-Governed Online Production Groups." ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2011., Number of Citations: 1
  • Reference 2: Ren, Yuqing, et al. "Increasing commitment to online communities: Designing from theory." University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN (2010)., Number of Citations: 3
  • Reference 3: Ren, Yuqing, and Robert E. Kraut. "Agent-based modeling to inform online community theory and design: Impact of discussion moderation on member commitment and contribution." Second round revise and resubmit at Information Systems Research (2010)., Number of Citations: 5
  • Reference 4: Kiesler, Sara, et al. Regulating behavior in online communities. MIT Press, 2012., Number of Citations: 10
  • Reference 5: Kraut, Robert, et al. "Beyond information: Developing the relationship between the individual and the group in online communities." Information Systems Research 10 (2010)., Number of Citations: 11

Professor Robert E. Kraut has reviewed this Wikipedia page, and provided us with the following comments to improve its quality:

The section on Online learning could be substantially reduced, with pointers to the E-learning - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia and Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) - Wikipedia articles.

A Armstrong and J Hagel of the Harvard Business Review, addresses a handful of elements that are key to the growth of an online community and its success in drawing in members. HBR is a tertiary source & shouldn't be relied upon. There are many better reviews of what makes online communities success.

Amy Jo Kim's membership lifecycle's work is both old & impressionistic.

In this example, the article which was available on focuses specifically on online communities related to business, but its points can be transferred and can apply to any online community in general as well. This sounds like personal opinion, not verified info.

Learning trajectory in participation. Refer to Preece & Sheiderman's Reader to Leader Framework. But other research suggests that people who become heavy contributors are heavy at day one. E.g., Panciera, K., Halfaker, A., & Terveen, L. (2009). Wikipedians are born, not made: A study of power editors on Wikipedia Proceedings of the ACM 2009 international conference on supporting group work table of contents (pp. 51-60 ). New York: ACM Press.

We hope Wikipedians on this talk page can take advantage of these comments and improve the quality of the article accordingly.

ExpertIdeasBot (talk) 22:03, 31 October 2014 (UTC)


First off, apologies for the edit I quickly slapped together and undid reverts to, repeatedly. But I still hold my position, I believe the trolling & harassment section is in need of large overhaul. I cannot give valid sources for this (apparently), and as useful as UrbanDic is, I see how it is not considered a valid source. In any case, the definition of "trolling" in this article (and others) poorly reflects the actual goals and motivations of trolls, their community itself, and what they actually do in the first place, and rather reflects the bastardised definition the media in recent years has felt the need to vomit outwards into the farthest reaching points of society, this being of the child-like assholes (and on occasion, actual children) on Twitter that so beautifully demonstrate to us how screwed we are in any effort to find a positive use for the lower half of the 21st century's generation. But I digress, this section wholly needs a massive revamp. If any professional Wikipedians are reading, and believe have the ability to complete the difficult task of researching and evaluating for this topic, fulfilling the glorious prophecy I have foretold, and restoring the public image of trolls and trollers alike, I shall forever be in their debt. Thank you. (talk) 15:40, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Role of invisible audience in online communities[edit]

As Michael Bernstein shows in his "Quantifying Invisible Audience in Social Networks", lurkers or invisible audience are one reason of members' participation in online communities. So, following paragraph can be added to the participation or motivation section of the article:

Users’ perception of audience is another reason that makes users participate in online communities. Results showed that users usually underestimate their amount of audiences in online communities. Social media users guess that their audience is 27% of its real size. Regardless of this underestimation, it is shown that amount of audience affect users to self-presentation and also content production which means a higher level of participation.

Here is the link of supporting article:

Daraei.sara (talk) 22:17, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Daraei.sara

@Daraei.sara: Could you please add this information to the article? Btw. please don't forget to sign your talk page posts. --Fixuture (talk) 08:14, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Online health communities[edit]

As another type of online communities, online health communities could be added to this article because of heavy usage of online health communities by internet users. I am interested to use these articles in order to add this parts. Here is what I think is good to be added to the article:

Online health communities is one example of online communities which is heavily used by internet users [1, 2, 3]. A key benefit of online health communities is providing user access to other users with similar problems or experiences which has a significant impact on the lives of their members [1]. Through people participation, online health communities will be able to offer patients opportunities for emotional support [4, 5] and also will provide them access to experience-based information about particular problem or possible treatment strategies. Even in some studies, it is shown that users find experienced-based information more relevant than information which was prescribed by professionals [6, 7, 8]. Moreover, allowing patients to collaborate anonymously in some of online health communities suggests users a non-judgmental environment to share their problems, knowledge, and experiences [9].

These are some sources I am willing to use:

[1] Neal, Lisa, et al. "Online health communities." CHI'07 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2007.

[2] Chou, Wen-Ying Sylvia, et al. "Social media use in the United States: implications for health communication." Journal of medical Internet research 11.4 (2009): e48.

[3] Chou, Wen-ying Sylvia, et al. "Health-related Internet use among cancer survivors: data from the Health Information National Trends Survey, 2003–2008." Journal of Cancer Survivorship 5.3 (2011): 263-270.

[4] Farnham, S., et al. HutchWorld: clinical study of computer-mediated social support for cancer patients and their caregivers. (2002) In Proc. CHI 2002, 375-382.

[5] Maloney-Krichmar, D. and Preece, J. A multilevel analysis of sociability, usability, and community dynamics in an online health community. (2005) ACM TOCHI 12, 2, 201-232.

[6] Lasker, J.N., Sogolow, E.D., and Sharim, R.R. The role of an online community for people with a rare disease: content analysis of messages posted on a primary biliary cirrhosis mailinglist. (2005) Journal of Medical Internet Research 7, 1, e10.

[7] Frost, J. and Massagli, M. PatientsLikeMe the case for a data-centered patient community and how ALS patients use the community to inform treatment decisions and manage pulmonary health. (2009) Chronic Respiratory Disease 6, 4, 225 -229.

[8] Preece, J. Empathic communities: reaching out across the Web. (1998) interactions 5, 2, 32-43.

[9]. Hwang, K.O., et al. Social support in an Internet weight loss community. (2010) International Journal of Medical Informatics 79, 1, 5-13.

Daraei.sara (talk) 22:17, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Daraei.sara

@Daraei.sara: Could you please add this to the article yourself as well? It's more than good as it stands and if people would like to improve it they can simply edit the article.
Oh and for the references instead of numbering and listing them you simply write <ref>Neal, Lisa, et al. "Online health communities." CHI'07 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2007.</ref> where you wrote [1] etc.--Fixuture (talk) 08:14, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Removal of Online Health and Online Learning sections[edit]

At the end of the article there are two sections for Online Health Communities, and Online Learning Communities. I would query whether these sections are necessary given that there are already two existing articles about these topics (that are more indepth) here and here. I would suggest removing these two sections and adding in references to the two existing sections in the See Also section. Perhaps it would be pertinent to include a section on Typologies which would encompass these? Let me know what you think.

Gallags6 (talk) 14:50, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Support for merging these sections out to their articles and only linking to them from the see alsos. Good finding. Btw I'm not sure if {{Split section}} should have been used. --Fixuture (talk) 19:27, 24 April 2017 (UTC)