|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
history doesn't go back very far
The history starts more or less with: "Some of the earliest forms of online community websites included TheGlobe.com (1994), GeoCities (1994), and Tripod.com (1995)"? What about Usenet (1980), PLATO (1973), or BBSs? --Delirium (talk) 01:44, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
misleading and missing information in "life cycle"
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. 188.8.131.52 (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)
way to see total page views for "online community" ?
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!!
How about some images?
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
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 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:184.108.40.206. 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
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 mendeley.com 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.
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. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 15:40, 19 April 2015 (UTC)