[OSList] What's going on with the OST entry on Wikipedia lately?

[Michael M Pannwitz]

Dear Steve,

first impression I had on reading the wikipedia entry was: Sabotage.

I checked the German version. Even though I am not happy with it (being 
a radical purist) its more or less ok. In the meantime, the actual 
practice is far more developed as well as the understanding what OST is 
really about (expand time and space for the force of selforganisation to 
unfold) is not reflected upon.

It seems to me the next WOSonOS in October in Berlin is an opportunity 
for all interested in this to post the wikipedia entry as an issue. 
Maybe even in different languages (I never would suggest translating the 
english version into another language), such as German, Swedish, 
Chinese, Hebrew, Dutch, Italian (I am suggesting these knowing that 
folks from countries where these languages are common will be at the 
WOSonOS).

In general, I love wikipedia and the way that stuff is characterized 
("This article contains content that is written like an advertisement. 
Please help improve it by removing promotional content and inappropriate 
external links, and by adding encyclopedic content written from a 
neutral point of view. (July 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this 
template message") gives you hints on the quality of the entry.
There seems to be no way of avoiding folks messing with an entry that 
are from a different planet.

Greetings from Berlin
mmp


Am 19.02.2020 um 00:27 schrieb Steve Holyer via OSList:
> Hi Ya'll,
> 
> Yesterday, I checked Wikipedia for a quick encyclopedic description of 
> Open Space Technology.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Space_Technology
> 
> It seems that several edits were made in the last 6 months ago or so. Up 
> until mid 2019 I thought the wikipedia entry was good (if lacking in 
> some nuance out of necessity). After changes, the current entry 
> describes a very unusual Open Space. The Open Space it describes is not 
> an Open Space that I want to be a part of.
> 
> I recognise Wikipedia is not going to be perfect, but I feel like the 
> current entry is actually misleading, and I think it's harmful.  I'd 
> like to do something about that.
> 
> I'm raising this to the OSLIST because I see that Harrison, Chris 
> Corrigan and others were actively making edits on the Wikipedia entry 
> and discussing it on this list between 2008 and 2015 at least. I don' 
> see anyone from this community working on this now (although I could 
> have missed some signs). However, I know there is  history and 
> experience here dealing with the Wikipedia ecosystem.
> 
> If it's a good use of time and energy, I can help make edits to the 
> page, but my question is how would we approach this as member of the 
> community on OSLIST? What experience and history can members here bring 
> to bear.
> 
> (Btw this IS my first posting to OLIST, but I've been lurking around, 
> and meeting different parts of
> this community online and face to face.)
> 
> That's the gist of my question. A few details/examples follow my signature.
> 
> Cheers,
> Steve
> 
> A few of the more outrageous details/examples (IMO)
> 
> There is text that appears to describe the sponsor introducing paid 
> speakers in the opening. (I don't think a circle is mentioned).
> 
> In fact, the article keeps referring to the "speakers" and the "speaking 
> schedule", which gives me the impression that Open Space is a talking 
> head conference that's simply easier to organise because you don't have 
> to make speaker schedules in advance.
> 
> This statement from the article seems antithetical to Open Space 
> Technology to me: "At the end of the best open space meetings, a 
> debriefing document is compiled summarizing what worked and what did not 
> work, so the process can go more smoothly next time ... Constant 
> improvement of meeting design is vital for attendees to feel taken care 
> of and to creating the perception of value from the meeting proceedings."
> 
> The article claims to be paraphrasing Micheal Hermann's post here at 
> OSWorld 
> https://web.archive.org/web/20150518200725/http://openspaceworld.org/wp2/what-is/ 
> by stating: "Several meaningful outcomes can and should be specifically 
> built into the process (safety, trust, courtesy)". I don't Michael says 
> anything of the sort. Don't think he would. But if he does say it, he 
> doesn't say it in the post referenced by the citation.
> _______________________________________________
> OSList mailing list
> To post send emails to OSList at lists.openspacetech.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to OSList-leave at lists.openspacetech.org
> To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:
> http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
> Past archives can be viewed here: 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/oslist@lists.openspacetech.org

-- 
Michael M Pannwitz
Draisweg 1, 12209 Berlin, Germany
++49 - 30-772 8000
mmpannwitz at gmail.com


Check out the Open Space World Map presently showing 489 resident Open 
Space Workers in 76 countries working in a total of 142 countries worldwide
www.openspaceworldmap.org

At my publisher you find books and task cards on open space and other 
treasures, most in German, some in English, some as ebooks, some 
multilingual
https://www.westkreuz-verlag.de/de/Kommunikation