The Intersection of Marginalia and Wikipedia's Struggle with Creators

The Intersection of Marginalia and Wikipedia's Struggle with Creators

In the realm of knowledge sharing and documentation, two interesting phenomena emerge: marginalia and Wikipedia's struggle with creators. While seemingly unrelated, these two topics share commonalities and raise important questions about the way we perceive and value information.

Marginalia, a practice dating back to ancient times, involves leaving annotations, comments, or doodles in the margins of books and documents. These marginal notes serve as a legacy, offering insights and distillations of knowledge for future readers. Notably, Fermat's claim of a proof for his last theorem, too extensive to fit within the margin, stands as a famous mathematical marginal note.

The concept of marginalia finds resonance in Catherine C. Marshall's research on user annotation of texts. Marshall discovered that students in various university departments actively sought out used books with annotations, appreciating the distilled knowledge left by their predecessors. This phenomenon highlights the value of marginalia as a means of understanding concepts and building upon previous insights.

On the other hand, Wikipedia's struggle with creators revolves around the issue of notability. In this vast encyclopedia, only 20% of biographies feature women, underscoring an imbalance in representation. The notion of notability itself is subjective, and Wikipedia attempts to address this by setting guidelines that emphasize reputable, secondary media coverage as a measure of significance.

However, the question of what constitutes a "reliable" secondary source and the credibility of publications becomes a point of contention. The criteria for notability can be vague, leaving room for subjective decisions by reviewers. Moreover, the reliance on mainstream publications as reputable sources inherently neglects the coverage of niche subjects, such as Twitch and creator circles, which may only be reported by specialized publications.

Content creators, through their impact and growing audiences, establish their own notability. In fact, studies show that consumers trust influencer product recommendations more than celebrity endorsements. Yet, the current system of information sharing, particularly on Wikipedia, is often gatekept by a small group of editors, predominantly male.

This gatekeeping raises questions about the future of documentation and history. As Natureium, a Wikipedia editor, aptly put it, "We cover what reliable sources cover." However, this approach neglects the influence that Wikipedia itself holds over the media landscape. The struggle to define a creator's notability on a large, free source of knowledge like Wikipedia will only continue to grow as the Creator Revolution surges forward.

In light of these intersecting topics, it is essential to consider actionable advice to address the challenges they present:

• 1. Embrace Marginalia in the Digital Age: As we navigate the digital realm, encourage the practice of leaving annotations, comments, and insights on online platforms. These modern forms of marginalia can serve as valuable contributions to the collective knowledge of future generations.

• 2. Rethink Notability Criteria: Wikipedia should reassess its notability guidelines to ensure a more inclusive representation of diverse creators. By recognizing the impact and influence of content creators beyond mainstream media, we can create a more equitable and comprehensive knowledge base.

• 3. Foster Collaboration and Diversity in Editing: To overcome the gatekeeping tendencies within Wikipedia, it is crucial to encourage a more diverse group of editors. By actively involving individuals from different backgrounds and perspectives, we can ensure a more balanced and inclusive representation of knowledge.

In conclusion, the intersection of marginalia and Wikipedia's struggle with creators sheds light on the evolving nature of information sharing and documentation. By recognizing the value of marginal notes and reevaluating notability criteria, we can foster a more inclusive and diverse knowledge landscape. As we navigate the Creator Revolution, collaboration and openness will be key in shaping the future of our documentation and history.