Draft talk:The Holocaust in Wikipedia

New sources for the article

for background

• as controversial topic: Yasseri, Taha, Anselm Spoerri, Mark Graham, and János Kertész. "The most controversial topics in Wikipedia." Global Wikipedia: International and cross-cultural issues in online collaboration 25 (2014): 25-48.
• as influencing public knowledge: see paragraph in Pfanzelter, Eva. "Performing the Holocaust on social networks-Digitality, transcultural memory and new forms of narrating." Kultura Popularna 51, no. 01 (2017): 136-151. [Pfanzelter, Eva. "Performing the Holocaust on social networks-Digitality, transcultural memory and new forms of narrating." Kultura Popularna 51, no. 01 (2017): 136-151.]

Bias: Mentions deleteion of Holocaust in Estonia: Stahel, David. "The battle for Wikipedia: The new age of ‘lost victories’?." The journal of Slavic military studies 31, no. 3 (2018): 396-402.

Manca, Stefania. "Bridging cultural studies and learning science: An investigation of social media use for Holocaust memory and education in the digital age." Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies 43, no. 3 (2021): 226-253. -- Mentions 4 Wikipedia studies: Memory wars and counter-memories: Wolniewicz-Slomka, 2016, Makhortykh (2017a) and 2019, and under Museum and memorial use: Pfanzelter (2015)

Use of WP to map awareness: Tausch, Arno. "The political geography of Shoah knowledge and awareness, estimated from the analysis of global library catalogues and Wikipedia user statistics." Jewish Political Studies Review 31, no. 1/2 (2020): 7-123.

Shortcomings of using Wikipedia in Totten, Samuel. "What about “Other” Genocides?: An Educator's Dilemma or an Educator's Opportunity?." In Essentials of Holocaust Education, pp. 197-210. Routledge, 2016.

Conceptual but also cites Holocaust research:

• Pentzold, C. (2009). Fixing the Floating Gap: The Online Encyclopaedia Wikipedia as a Global Memory Place. Memory Studies, 2(2), 255–272. doi:10.1177/1750698008102055
• Ferron, Michela, and Paolo Massa. "Studying collective memories in Wikipedia." Journal of Social Theory 3, no. 4 (2011): 449-466.
• Quantitative follow-up, minimal on Holocaust: Ferron, Michela, and Paolo Massa. "Beyond the encyclopedia: Collective memories in Wikipedia." Memory Studies 7, no. 1 (2014): 22-45.

WP as a resource

• Cooey as cited in draft

• Uses Cooey: García-González, Herminio, and Mike Bryant. "The Holocaust Archival Material Knowledge Graph." In International Semantic Web Conference, pp. 362-379. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2023.
• De Leeuw, Daan, Mike Bryant, Michal Frankl, Ivelina Nikolova, and Vladimir Alexiev. "Digital methods in holocaust studies: the European holocaust research infrastructure." In 2018 IEEE 14th International Conference on e-Science (e-Science), pp. 58-66. IEEE, 2018.

• main source for this book: Brownstein, Rich. Holocaust Cinema Complete: A History and Analysis of 400 Films, with a Teaching Guide. Mcfarland, 2021.

WP

• tracing art. Zuckerman, Laurel. "Linked Data and Holocaust Era Art Markets: Gaps and Dysfunctions in the Knowledge Supply Chain." In COLCO, pp. 13-24. 2020. [1]

Spot on: Makhortykh, Mykola. "Remediating violence: Second World War memory on Wikipedia." Remembrance and Solidarity (2018): 123. [2]

This looks promising but not sure if published. Bastian, Mariella; Makhortykh, Mykola (12 September 2019). "The same but different? Constructing the history of the Holocaust on Wikipedia" (Unpublished). Digital Humanities Benelux 2019. Liege. September 11-13. [3]

• Related, earlier: Makhortykh, Mykola; Bastian, Mariella (2 July 2019). The neutral point of view and the black hole of Auschwitz: Crowdsourcing the history of the Holocaust on Wikipedia (Unpublished). In: EHRI Academic Conference "Holocaust Studies in the Digital Age. What's New?". Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 02.07.2019. [4]

To achieve better understanding how internet users interact with historical traumas through collaborative history-writing, we look how the Holocaust memory is constructed and negotiated on Wikipedia. So far, only a few studies (Pfanzelter 2015; Wolniewicz-Slomka, 2016) discuss the role of Wikipedia in the context of the Holocaust remembrance; yet, all of them focus on the platform's use for representing separate episodes of the Holocaust. By contrast, we look on the broader context of the Holocaust memorialization and ask if collaborative history-writing on Wikipedia can encourage the transnational dialogue about the traumatic past or, instead, create additional obstacles for it by promoting hoaxes and igniting hate. Specifically, we analyze to what degree the differences in historical paradigms between Eastern and Western Europe are projected on Wikipedia and how the collaborative history-writing about the Holocaust is influenced by the amalgamation of cultural practices, individual agendas and platform policies. We implemented our analysis in two stages: first, we used a web crawler to retrieve articles about the Holocaust on Wikipedia and map of semantic relations between these articles in Eastern (i.e. Ukrainian, Russian, Polish, and Belorussian) and Western European (i.e. English, German, and Dutch) versions of the encyclopedia. Then, we employed social network analysis to compare how these relations vary between different Wikipedia versions: specifically, we examined how specific episodes of the Holocaust are integrated into the larger WWII narratives and which of these episodes are more exposed or marginalized. Our findings indicated a number of distinctions between specific language versions in relation both to the presence/absence of specific episodes and the centrality of these episodes. Secondly, based on the mapping, we identified articles which were central for the semantic structures of the Holocaust representation in specific language versions. We then explored these articles using qualitative content analysis. Specifically, we looked on their discussion pages to examine how Wikipedia authors collaboratively construct the Holocaust history and solve disagreements about the interpretations of its specific episodes. While doing so, we analyzed how Wikipedia authors employed different discursive strategies (Kriplean et al., 2007; Makhortykh, 2018) to legitimize their stance on the specific episodes of the Holocaust; examples of such strategies varied from references to prior consensus to threats of sanctions against ideological opponents. Our analysis indicated the presence of distinct approaches to negotiating the traumatic past between specific language versions which can be attributed to the cultural differences in the ways Wikipedia practices and norms are interpreted and instrumentalized by individual authors. ProfGray (talk) 22:26, 5 November 2024 (UTC)