<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Hi Scott,<br>
<br>
I think the actions against the project follow the traditional "art !=
information" view. Such a view would render the new page incompatible
with Wikipedia as soon as Wikipedia is categorized as a database of
information by the gatekeepers, a strict interpretation of an
encyclopedia. This is I think the view which the Wikipedia gatekeepers
have adopted and is likely a response to earlier fallout from media
hype around poor quality of articles and other comparisons to more
traditional forms of information collection. At that level, its
collaborative functionality is probably treated as a means, and not an
end. Similarly the internet is probably envisioned as a mechanical
tool, rather than a legitimizing "natural environment" in which the
performative art is embedded. Is there reconcilable "ideology" on
either side of the fence?<br>
--Andreas<br>
<br>
Scott Kildall wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4D6B4588-B486-4843-9044-34DE2647F5E2@kildall.com"
type="cite">
<div style="">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>Hi everyone,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>There has been much talk about the "Wikipedia Art" project in
various online circles, blogs and lists. Trebor has asked me to write
about the project and the response for IDC.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Here is an abbreviated history of the
intervention/project/collaboration. Note: this history is still being
written.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b>At 12pm (PST) on Feb 14th 2009</b>, Scott Kildall
and Nathaniel Stern launched the "Wikipedia Art" project, along with
several collaborators, including Brian Sherwin, Patrick Lichty and Jon
Coffelt.</div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>An article appeared on Wikipedia -- called "Wikipedia Art" --
with the following description:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</div>
<div><b>Wikipedia Art</b> is a conceptual art work composed on
Wikipedia, and is thus art that anyone can edit. It manifests as a
standard page on Wikipedia - entitled "Wikipedia Art". Like all
Wikipedia entries, anyone can alter this page as long as their
alterations meet Wikipedia's standards of quality and verifiability[1].
As a consequence of such collaborative and consensus-driven edits to
the page, Wikipedia Art, itself, changes over time.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div><b>Concept</b></div>
<div>Wikipedia Art is an art intervention which explicitly invites
performative utterances in order to change the work itself. The ongoing
composition and performance of Wikipedia Art is intended to point to
the "invisible authors and authorities" of Wikipedia, and by extension
the Internet,[2] as well as the site's extant criticisms: bias,
consensus over credentials, reliability and accuracy, vandalism, etc.[3]</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Scott Kildall and Nathaniel Stern, Wikipedia Art's initiators,
refer to the work's publish-cite-transform feedback loop as
"performative citations." They maintain that the project "intervenes in
Wikipedia as a venue in the contemporary construction of knowledge and
information, and simultaneously intervenes in our understandings of art
and the art object".[2] The artists request writers and editors to join
in the collaboration and construction / transformation / destruction /
resurrection of the work, want their " intervention to be intervened
in."[2] Stern and Kildall say that "like knowledge and like art,
Wikipedia Art is always already variable."[2]</div>
<div><b><br>
</b></div>
<div><b>History</b></div>
<div>Wikipedia Art was initially created by artists Scott Kildall and
Nathaniel Stern on February 14 2009. It was performatively birthed
through a dual launch on Wikipedia and MyArtSpace, where art critic,
writer, and blogger, Brian Sherwin, introduced and published their
staged two-way interview, "Wikipedia Art - A Fireside Chat."[2] The
interview ended with Stern declaring, "I now pronounce Wikipedia Art."
Kildall's response: "It’s alive! Alive!" </div>
</div>
<div>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b>Minutes later, </b>several online essays, interviews and blog
postings were released and then re-cited on the Wikipedia page, giving
it external "legitimacy" and thereby initiating the feedback loop
described in the original article.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Interview with Nathaniel Stern and Scott Kildall</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.myartspace.com/blog/2009/02/wikipedia-art-virtual-fireside-chat.html">http://www.myartspace.com/blog/2009/02/wikipedia-art-virtual-fireside-chat.html</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Essay by Patrick Lichty "WikiPedia art?" (posted on Furtherfield)</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://blog.furtherfield.org/?q=node/267">http://blog.furtherfield.org/?q=node/267</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>A New Take on Art by Haydn Shaughnessy</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.mediangler.com/2009/02/13/a-new-take-on-art/">http://www.mediangler.com/2009/02/13/a-new-take-on-art/</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>What is Wikipedia Art? by Jon Coffelt</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://thewhole9.com/blogs/applestooranges/2009/02/14/what-is-wikipedia-art/">http://thewhole9.com/blogs/applestooranges/2009/02/14/what-is-wikipedia-art/</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b>Within an hour</b>, the article was marked "AfD" (article for
deletion) for not adhering to Wikipedia standards. The Wikipedia
process for AfDs is to engage a debate about the Wikipedia-worthiness
of the page for a period of least 5 days until the Wikipedia community
weighs in.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b>15 minutes later,</b> the pre-existing Wikipedia pages for
Scott Kildall, Nathaniel Stern and Brian Sherwin were also similarly
tagged with "COI" tags and "Citation" tags (a precursor to article
deletion) by the same Wikipedia editor that marked the Wikipedia Art
article for deletion. This action could be described as retaliatory.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b>In the next several hours,</b> a heated debate ensued on the
deletion page with sides weighing in on KEEP or DELETE. The core
problem is that many found the concept itself to be confusing. Did this
point out a hole in the authority-structure of Wikipedia? Is it a valid
work of art? Is it vandalism? Does it adhere to Wikipedia standards of
notability? Is it improperly self-referential? </div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://wikipediaart.org/wiki/index.php?title=Articles_for_deletion/Wikipedia_Art">http://wikipediaart.org/wiki/index.php?title=Articles_for_deletion/Wikipedia_Art</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div><b>In the meantime,</b> several other online writers, responding
to our press releases calling for collaboration wrote articles of their
own. Here is a sampling:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Hello Wikipedia, its the Blogosphere Calling</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://twocoatsofpaint.blogspot.com/2009/02/hello-wikipedia-its-blogosphere-calling.html">http://twocoatsofpaint.blogspot.com/2009/02/hello-wikipedia-its-blogosphere-calling.html</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Digg's Way of Seeing</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://diggydivision.tumblr.com/post/78355063/http-wikipediaart-org">http://diggydivision.tumblr.com/post/78355063/http-wikipediaart-org</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Look, See (2008) by Chris Ashley</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://looksee.chrisashley.net/?p=1563">http://looksee.chrisashley.net/?p=1563</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b>Also</b>, many people added to the Wikipedia Art page,
providing context and additional citations.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b>15 hours later,</b> "Wedna", an 18-year old Wikipedia admin
promptly deleted the page, violating Wikipedia's own requirement of a 5
day period for AfDs. In his profile, he describes himself as: "An old
hand. I've been around since mid-2005"</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b>in the wee hours of the morning</b>, two different people
added "Wikipedia Art" to the "Conceptual Art" page on Wikipedia. Both
entries are quickly removed.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b>Sunday, Feb 15th, <span class="Apple-style-span"
style="font-weight: normal;">is a bit of aftermath, some more threads
appeared</span></b></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>"Help! I have created a monster" by the original Wikipedia
editor (this is not the 18-year old) who marked it Afd, where he
expresses feelings of despair over the mess. In various comments, we
are likened to three Ts: terrorists, trolls and Tristan Tzara</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://wikipediaart.org/wiki/index.php?title=Village_pump">http://wikipediaart.org/wiki/index.php?title=Village_pump</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Net-time Thread by Edward Shanken. Many responses follow.</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://mail.kein.org/pipermail/nettime-l/2009-February/001221.html">http://mail.kein.org/pipermail/nettime-l/2009-February/001221.html</a></div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div><b>Monday, February 16th </b>(*)<b>, <span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;">mo</span><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;">re blog coverage
gets propagated about the intervention, noting its immediate failure or
success.(**)</span></b></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>Media Arts Education by Daniela Reimann</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://daniela-reimann.de/wordpress/?p=173">http://daniela-reimann.de/wordpress/?p=173</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>Ethan Ham (Technology-based contemporary art)</div>
<div><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.ethanham.com/blog/2009/02/wikipedia-art.html">http://www.ethanham.com/blog/2009/02/wikipedia-art.html</a> </span></b></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Wikipedia Art Lasts All Day! by Paddy Johnson</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.artfagcity.com/2009/02/16/wikipedia-art-lasts-all-day/">http://www.artfagcity.com/2009/02/16/wikipedia-art-lasts-all-day/</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>(*) this is the date of this posting on IDC</div>
<div>(**) in phone conversations between Nathaniel Stern and Scott
Kildall, it was decided that "failure was an option"</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b>Here is a link to the project</b></div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.wikipediaart.org/">http://www.wikipediaart.org</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I am most curious about YOUR thoughts on the "Wikipedia Art"
project. Do you see this project as one that points out an inherent
problem with the way that histories and knowledge is propagated? Or,
does it appear as a vandalistic act done by a "gang of artists"?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>I specifically invite discussion the larger issues that the
project raises: Wikipedia-as-entity, performative utterances in
net-space and the boundaries between intervention/vandalism/conceptual
art.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Scott Kildall</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.kildall.com">www.kildall.com</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<pre wrap="">
<hr size="4" width="90%">
_______________________________________________
iDC -- mailing list of the Institute for Distributed Creativity (distributedcreativity.org)
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:iDC@mailman.thing.net">iDC@mailman.thing.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mailman.thing.net/mailman/listinfo/idc">https://mailman.thing.net/mailman/listinfo/idc</a>
List Archive:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/">http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/</a>
iDC Photo Stream:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/idcnetwork/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/idcnetwork/</a>
RSS feed:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://rss.gmane.org/gmane.culture.media.idc">http://rss.gmane.org/gmane.culture.media.idc</a>
iDC Chat on Facebook:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2457237647">http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2457237647</a>
Share relevant URLs on Del.icio.us by adding the tag iDCref</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>