Search (14 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Informationsmittel"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Kohn, R.S.: Of Descartes and of train schedules : Evaluating the Encyclopedia Judaica, Wikipedia, and other general and Jewish Studies encyclopedias (2010) 0.04 
    0.044512264 = product of:
  0.08902453 = sum of:
    0.08902453 = product of:
      0.17804906 = sum of:
        0.17804906 = weight(_text_:encyclopedia in 3633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17804906 = score(doc=3633,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.270842 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.6573909 = fieldWeight in 3633, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3633)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to discuss the second edition of the Encyclopaedia Judaica (2007) within its broader historical context of the production of encyclopedias in the twentieth and the twenty-first centuries. The paper contrasts the 2007 edition of the Encyclopaedia Judaica to the Jewish Encyclopedia published between 1901 and 1905, and to the first edition of the Encyclopaedia Judaica published in 1972; then contrasts the 2007 edition of the Encyclopaedia Judaica to Wikipedia and to other projects of online encyclopedias. Design/methodology/approach - The paper provides a personal reflective review of the sources in question. Findings - That Encyclopaedia Judaica in its latest edition does not adequately replace the original first edition in terms of depth of scholarly work. It is considered that the model offered by Wikipedia could work well for the Encyclopaedia Judaica, allowing it to retain the core of the expert knowledge, and at the same time channel the energy of volunteer editors which has made Wikipedia such a success. Practical implications - The paper is of interest to those with an interest in encyclopedia design or Jewish studies. Originality/value - This paper provides a unique reflection on the latest edition of the encyclopedia and considers future models for its publication based on traditional and non-traditional methods.
    Object
    Encyclopedia Judaica
  2. Luyt, B.: ¬The inclusivity of Wikipedia and the drawing of expert boundaries : an examination of talk pages and reference lists (2012) 0.03 
    0.03378243 = product of:
  0.06756486 = sum of:
    0.06756486 = product of:
      0.13512972 = sum of:
        0.13512972 = weight(_text_:encyclopedia in 391) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13512972 = score(doc=391,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.270842 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.49892458 = fieldWeight in 391, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=391)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Wikipedia is frequently viewed as an inclusive medium. But inclusivity within this online encyclopedia is not a simple matter of just allowing anyone to contribute. In its quest for legitimacy as an encyclopedia, Wikipedia relies on outsiders to judge claims championed by rival editors. In choosing these experts, Wikipedians define the boundaries of acceptable comment on any given subject. Inclusivity then becomes a matter of how the boundaries of expertise are drawn. In this article I examine the nature of these boundaries and the implications they have for inclusivity and credibility as revealed through the talk pages produced and sources used by a particular subset of Wikipedia's creators-those involved in writing articles on the topic of Philippine history.
  3. Höhn, S.: Stalins Badezimmer in Wikipedia : Die Macher der Internet-Enzyklopädie diskutieren über Verantwortung und Transparenz. Der Brockhaus kehrt dagegen zur gedruckten Ausgabe zurück. (2012) 0.03 
    0.03209561 = product of:
  0.06419122 = sum of:
    0.06419122 = sum of:
      0.03981298 = weight(_text_:encyclopedia in 2171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03981298 = score(doc=2171,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.270842 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05089233 = queryNorm
          0.14699706 = fieldWeight in 2171, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2171)
      0.024378244 = weight(_text_:22 in 2171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.024378244 = score(doc=2171,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17821628 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05089233 = queryNorm
          0.13679022 = fieldWeight in 2171, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2171)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    Der neue Herausgeber des Brockhaus, ein Tochterverlag von Bertelsmann, hat unterdessen angekündigt, zum gedruckten Lexikon zurückzukehren. Etwa Anfang 2015 soll die 22. Auflage erscheinen. In Zeiten des virtuellen Informationsoverkills gebe es einen Bedarf an Orientierung, an Relevanzvorgaben, sagt Geschäftsführer Christoph Hünermann. Ausgerechnet Bertelsmann druckte 2008 ein knapp 1 000 Seiten langes Wikipedia-Lexikon mit den 50 000 meist gesuchten Begriffen. Eine Experten-Redaktion überprüfte die Einträge sicherheitshalber zuvor - soll allerdings kaum Fehler gefunden haben."
    Object
    Encyclopedia Britannica
    Source
    Frankfurter Rundschau. Nr.76 vom 29.3.2012, S.22-23
  4. Callahan, E.S.; Herring, S.C.: Cultural bias in Wikipedia content on famous persons (2011) 0.02 
    0.023887785 = product of:
  0.04777557 = sum of:
    0.04777557 = product of:
      0.09555114 = sum of:
        0.09555114 = weight(_text_:encyclopedia in 4764) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09555114 = score(doc=4764,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.270842 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.35279295 = fieldWeight in 4764, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4764)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Wikipedia advocates a strict "neutral point of view" (NPOV) policy. However, although originally a U.S-based, English-language phenomenon, the online, user-created encyclopedia now has versions in many languages. This study examines the extent to which content and perspectives vary across cultures by comparing articles about famous persons in the Polish and English editions of Wikipedia. The results of quantitative and qualitative content analyses reveal systematic differences related to the different cultures, histories, and values of Poland and the United States; at the same time, a U.S./English-language advantage is evident throughout. In conclusion, the implications of these findings for the quality and objectivity of Wikipedia as a global repository of knowledge are discussed, and recommendations are advanced for Wikipedia end users and content developers.
  5. Tsikerdekis, M.: Personal communication networks and their positive effects on online collaboration and outcome quality on Wikipedia : an empirical exploration (2016) 0.02 
    0.01990649 = product of:
  0.03981298 = sum of:
    0.03981298 = product of:
      0.07962596 = sum of:
        0.07962596 = weight(_text_:encyclopedia in 2846) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07962596 = score(doc=2846,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.270842 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.29399413 = fieldWeight in 2846, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2846)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Online collaborative projects have been utilized in a variety of ways over the past decade, such as bringing people together to build open source software or developing the world's largest free encyclopedia. Personal communication networks as a feature do not exist in all collaborative projects. It is currently unclear if a designer's decision to include a personal communication network in a collaborative project's structure affects outcome quality. In this study, I investigated Wikipedia's personal communication network and analyzed which Wikipedia editors are utilizing it and how they are connected to outcome quality. Evidence suggests that people who utilize these networks are more experienced in editing high quality articles and are more integrated in the community. Additionally, these individuals utilize the personal communication network for coordinating and perhaps mentoring editors who edit lower quality articles. The value of these networks is demonstrated by the characteristics of the users who use them. These findings indicate that designers of online collaborative projects can help improve the quality of outcomes in these projects by deciding to implement a personal communication network in their communities.
  6. Schumann, L.; Stock, W.G.: ¬Ein umfassendes ganzheitliches Modell für Evaluation und Akzeptanzanalysen von Informationsdiensten : Das Information Service Evaluation (ISE) Modell (2014) 0.01 
    0.012066615 = product of:
  0.02413323 = sum of:
    0.02413323 = product of:
      0.04826646 = sum of:
        0.04826646 = weight(_text_:22 in 1492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04826646 = score(doc=1492,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17821628 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1492, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1492)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 9.2014 18:56:46
  7. Beuth, P.: Prophet und Profiteur : Jimmy Wales' Idee entwickelte ein Eigenleben (2010) 0.01 
    0.011943893 = product of:
  0.023887785 = sum of:
    0.023887785 = product of:
      0.04777557 = sum of:
        0.04777557 = weight(_text_:encyclopedia in 4338) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04777557 = score(doc=4338,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.270842 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.17639647 = fieldWeight in 4338, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=4338)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    Dabei wirkt es oft so, als würde Wales am liebsten etwas anderes tun: Lernen. Immerzu. Immer mehr. Der Wissensdurst des 44-Jährigen ist grenzenlos. Schon als Kind las er begeistert in der Encyclopedia Britannica. Im Interview mit der Frankfurter Rundschau bezeichnete er sich mal selbst als "Wissensstreber". Er interessiert sich für Spieltheorie, Politik, Segeln, er lernt zusammen mit seiner Tochter Programmiersprachen - und die deutsche Sprache, weil sie die zweitwichtigste in der Wikipedia ist. In den frühen 90er Jahren war er Moderator eines Philosophieforums, in dem es um den Objektivismus der russisch-amerikanischen Philosophin Ayn Rand ging. Wales ist ein großer Anhänger von Rands Theorien und bezeichnet sich selbst als einen "Objektivisten durch und durch". Was das bedeutet? "Das richtige moralische Ziel im Leben ist die Suche nach dem persönlichen Glück ... Das einzige gesellschaftliche System, das zu dazu passt, ist eines von vollem Respekt für die Rechte des Individuums, eingebettet in Laissez-faire-Kapitalismus." Steht jedenfalls in der englischsprachigen Wikipedia."
  8. Moll, S.: ¬Ein Tag ohne Weltwissen : In den USA wurden als Protest gegen ein geplantes Gesetz Recherche-Seiten lahmgelegt (2012) 0.01 
    0.011943893 = product of:
  0.023887785 = sum of:
    0.023887785 = product of:
      0.04777557 = sum of:
        0.04777557 = weight(_text_:encyclopedia in 4883) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04777557 = score(doc=4883,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.270842 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.17639647 = fieldWeight in 4883, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=4883)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    Ausnahmsweise die Originalquelle anschauen Die Washington Post riet zu so offensichtlichen Dingen, wie bei einer Suche mit Google einfach am Link zu Wikipedia vorbei zu scrollen und sich ausnahmsweise die Originalquellen anzuschauen, die ansonsten in Wikipedia zusammengefasst sind. Ein anderer Vorschlag war, ins Regal zu greifen und eine echte Enzyklopädie hervorzuholen. Das hätte sogar einen gewissen Kult-Faktor: "Das ist so ähnlich wie Vinyl zu hören." Die Medienseite mediate, die beim Boykott nicht mitmachte, verwies auf andere Nachschlagewerke im Internet, die bislang weniger populär waren, wie etwa everything2 oder Scholarpedia. Der Geheimtipp des Tages war jedoch ein kostenloses 30-Tage Probeabo der Encyclopedia Brittanica.
  9. Hartmann, B.: Ab ins MoMA : zum virtuellen Museumsgang (2011) 0.01 
    0.010342812 = product of:
  0.020685624 = sum of:
    0.020685624 = product of:
      0.04137125 = sum of:
        0.04137125 = weight(_text_:22 in 1821) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04137125 = score(doc=1821,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17821628 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1821, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1821)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    3. 5.1997 8:44:22
  10. Cho, H.; Chen, M.-H.; Chung, S.: Testing an integrative theoretical model of knowledge-sharing behavior in the context of Wikipedia (2010) 0.01 
    0.010342812 = product of:
  0.020685624 = sum of:
    0.020685624 = product of:
      0.04137125 = sum of:
        0.04137125 = weight(_text_:22 in 3460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04137125 = score(doc=3460,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17821628 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3460, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3460)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    1. 6.2010 10:13:22
  11. Okoli, C.; Mehdi, M.; Mesgari, M.; Nielsen, F.A.; Lanamäki, A.: Wikipedia in the eyes of its beholders : a systematic review of scholarly research on Wikipedia readers and readership (2014) 0.01 
    0.010342812 = product of:
  0.020685624 = sum of:
    0.020685624 = product of:
      0.04137125 = sum of:
        0.04137125 = weight(_text_:22 in 1540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04137125 = score(doc=1540,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17821628 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1540, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1540)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    18.11.2014 13:22:03
  12. Martínez-Ávila, D.; Chaves Guimarães, J.A.; Pinho, F.A.; Fox, M.J.: ¬The representation of ethics and knowledge organization in the WoS and LISTA databases (2015) 0.01 
    0.010342812 = product of:
  0.020685624 = sum of:
    0.020685624 = product of:
      0.04137125 = sum of:
        0.04137125 = weight(_text_:22 in 2358) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04137125 = score(doc=2358,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17821628 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2358, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2358)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    17. 2.2018 16:50:22
  13. Hildebrandt, J.; Beuth, P.: Macht Wikipedia schlau oder dumm? : die FR gibt Orientierungshilfen in der grenzenlosen Fundgrube (2010) 0.01 
    0.009953245 = product of:
  0.01990649 = sum of:
    0.01990649 = product of:
      0.03981298 = sum of:
        0.03981298 = weight(_text_:encyclopedia in 4180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03981298 = score(doc=4180,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.270842 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.14699706 = fieldWeight in 4180, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.321862 = idf(docFreq=586, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4180)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    Manipulation in WP wird immer existieren, einfach, weil es so leicht ist. Das schafft ein Grundmisstrauen bei jeder Nutzung von WP. JA: Auch wenn keine Enzyklopädie vor Fehlern gefeit ist - Wikipedia ist durch seine leichte Zugänglichkeit und die vielen verschiedenen Autoren besonders gefährdet. Manche Fehler werden schnell verbessert, andere erst Wochen später oder überhaupt nicht. Der erfundene elfte Vorname von Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg (2009) mag vergleichsweise harmlos sein, der Eintrag einiger "Borat"-Fans zu Kasachstan aus dem Jahr 2006 hingegen nicht ("Kasachstan größtes Land der Welt. Alle anderen Länder von kleinen Mädchen regiert."). Ein gedrucktes Lexikon kann man dagegen nicht umschreiben. NEIN: Die bisher durchgeführten Vergleichsstudien zeigen, dass in der Wikipedia nicht wesentlich mehr Fehler stecken als in anderen Enzyklopädien, etwa der Encyclopedia Britannica. Auch in der sind nicht alle Angaben korrekt. Ein Grundmisstrauen muss also sowieso vorhanden sein, so lange man nur eine Quelle benutzt. Wikipedia-Wissen ist gefiltertes und dadurch subjektives Second-Hand-Wissen, denn: Ein selbsternannter "Experte" hat dafür bestimmte Quellen ausgesucht und das für ihn Wichtigste zusammengefasst. JA: Vor allem die englischsprachige Wikipedia hat inzwischen Probleme, Autoren zu finden. Das Magazin Newsweek schreibt, dass sich erstmals mehr Autoren ab- als anmelden. Die Online-Enzyklopädie plant deshalb, Werber auszusenden, die neue Autoren an Land ziehen sollen. Auch in Deutschland erscheint bei sinkenden Autorenzahlen eine gleichbleibende Anzahl von Artikeln. NEIN: Die Zeit der Laien bei Wikipedia ist mehr oder weniger vorbei. Die Ansprüche der Community sind hoch. Ihre Mitglieder geben selbst zu, dass der Einstieg als Autor schwer geworden ist. Die "selbsternannten" Experten sind also in der Regel echte Experten. Und in alten Enzyklopädien war ein Redakteur oftmals gleich für mehrere Gebiete zuständig - während bei Wikipedia umgekehrt mehrere Experten an einem Thema arbeiten.
  14. Haubner, S.: "Als einfacher Benutzer ist man rechtlos" : Unter den freiwilligen Wikipedia-Mitarbeitern regt sich Unmut über die Administratoren (2011) 0.00 
    0.004309505 = product of:
  0.00861901 = sum of:
    0.00861901 = product of:
      0.01723802 = sum of:
        0.01723802 = weight(_text_:22 in 4567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01723802 = score(doc=4567,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17821628 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05089233 = queryNorm
            0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 4567, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4567)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    3. 5.1997 8:44:22

Authors

Languages

Themes