Philosophy democratized? A comparison between Wikipedia and two other Web–based philosophy resources
First Monday

Philosophy democratized? A comparison between Wikipedia and two other Web–based philosophy resources
by Beate Elvebakk

 

Abstract
This article compares the individuals categorized as twentieth century philosophers in Wikipedia with the selection found in two major edited and widely used online philosophy resources, The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (http://plato.stanford.edu), and the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (http://www.iep.utm.edu). These are both free online resources, but unlike Wikipedia, they are written and edited by members of the academic community, and thus sanctioned by the established communities. The individuals presented as twentieth century philosophers are compared along the parameters of year of birth, gender, and national and disciplinary backgrounds. The results show that although the types of academics listed in Wikipedia are generally similar to those in the other encyclopaedias, their relative youth and their very numbers may still serve to give the user a very different impression on philosophy as a field.

Contents

Introduction
Previous research
The encyclopaedias
Methodology
Results and discussion
Conclusions

 


 

Introduction

The Internet–based and user–generated encyclopaedia Wikipedia currently ranks among the ten most–visited Web sites worldwide (Wikipedia, 2008). It is also huge, and is still growing at a fast pace; the English Wikipedia edition had over 2,154,000 articles consisting of over 937,000,000 words as of 1 January 2008 (Wikipedia, 2008).

Wikipedia is widely used among students seeking information relevant to their studies. Prescott (2006) demonstrates that Wikipedia traffic is tied to the academic school year. In spite of this educational traffic, teachers and librarians are often sceptical of Wikipedia’s value as a source, since the contributors are multiple, uncertified and frequently unknown. In February 2007, the New York Times reported that the history department at Middlebury College requested that students not use Wikipedia as a source for their papers or exams (Cohen, 2007).

Informal tests of Wikipedia have, however, concluded that its articles generally maintain high quality, especially in subjects related to technology and the natural sciences (Giles, 2005; Wiegand, 2007). In the social sciences and humanities, however, the quality of the articles does not seem to have reached quite the same standards (Martens, 2006).

This article aims to investigate whether the aggregated information found in Wikipedia on twentieth century philosophers differs from what is found in two Web–based, yet more traditionally constructed encyclopaedias of philosophy. Given that philosophy is taught in schools and universities all of over the world, it is likely that these pages are also used as learning tools by many pupils and students. The question this article poses, then, is whether the information they will find, and therefore the image they will be given of philosophy as a discipline, differs substantially from what will happen if they use disciplinary encyclopaedias produced according to traditional academic standards of editing and peer review.

 

++++++++++

Previous research

Over the last few years, a number of researchers have investigated the quality of Wikipedia articles. Lih (2004) argued that article quality is a function of the number of contributors and edits, and this is supported by Wilkinson and Huberman (2007) who demonstrated that there is a high correlation between number of edits and contributors and article quality, as judged by the Wikipedia community through their selection of “featured articles.” A somewhat different perspective was presented by Duguid (2006), who maintained that there is no automatic relationship between the numbers of authors and resulting quality, as long as there exists no mechanism for removing inconsistencies in individual articles. He also pointed out that although Wikipedia as a whole attracts an enormous numbers of visitors, there are great numbers of less visited articles and categories that are likely to be characterized by much lower quality. This conclusion would in its turn seem to be confirmed by Wilkinson and Huberman (2007) who found that editing patterns in Wikipedia imply that “a small number of articles, corresponding to topics of high relevance or visibility, accrete a disproportionately large number of edits.” [1].

Chesney (2006) asked experts and non–experts to assess the quality of a selection of Wikipedia articles, and found that the experts ranked the articles significantly more credible than did non–experts, suggesting that the information is fairly accurate, although the quality ranking was not extremely high. Nielsen (2007) looked into the number of outbound scientific citations, and concluded that although the overall number of citations to scientific journals is quite small, the existing citations were highly correlated with those found in Thomson’s Journal Citations Reports.

Emigh and Herring (2005) found that Wikipedia’s articles are similar to those of traditional encyclopaedias in terms of content and level of formality, and viewed this as a double–edged sword, in that on the one hand, this similarity has probably contributed to Wikipedia’s acceptance and popularity, but, on the other, it also indicates that Wikipedia has not succeeded in its stated objective of providing access to alternative voices and points of view. This is also the conclusion reached by Bellomi and Bonato (2005), who made use of network analysis in order to study the aggregated content of the English language Wikipedia, as their results suggested that it is “strongly biased towards Western culture and history.”

Taken together, this research seems to suggest that Wikipedia content is generally, if not universally, trustworthy, but that the of quality of individual articles varies considerably. For better or for worse, Wikipedia does to a considerable extent mimic, or at least harmonize with, materials found in more traditional publications.

The question raised in this article, however, does not directly pertain to the quality or content of individual Wikipedia entries, but rather the topics covered, which is, as we shall see, perhaps not wholly unrelated to the problem of the reliability of Wikipedia as a source of information. Similarity or contrast to traditional literature is also a function of what kinds of information are made available, in other words: what entries can be found (or not found), and how these are grouped under various subject headings. This paper seeks to find whether this is the case for a particular subject area; that is philosophers from the twentieth century.

 

++++++++++

The encyclopaedias

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (SEP) (http://plato.stanford.edu/), is a “dynamic online reference work” (Allen, et al., 2002). It is dynamic in the sense that articles may continuously be added, updated, revised or expanded, to reflect developments in the field. Versions of SEP are “fixed” four times a year, and previous versions are retained in its archives. Updates from the last three months are listed in the “What’s new?” section, where it is also specified whether it the change consists in adding a new entry, or revisions to existing entries. Articles are relatively traditional in form, but authors are encouraged create “nested” documents, where “highly technical, scholarly, or highly detailed” information is put into supplementary documents, linked to the main article (Allen, et al., 2002).

Entries are written by individual academics, who are assigned the task, either based on their own submitted suggestions or commissions. All articles are signed by the author. The academic quality of the articles is to be ensured by an editorial board consisting of three principal editors and (as of 1 June 2007) 52 subject editors, many of whom are leading scholars in their respective fields. The members of the editorial board, along with around 50 occasional referees, review all new entries and “substantive updates,” whereas the faculty of the Philosophy Department at Stanford University make up the editorial board. The Encyclopaedia is aimed at “academics and the general public” and articles are available through search engines. The SEP is mainly funded by a series of grants.

The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (IEP) (http://www.iep.utm.edu/) is a similar initiative, founded in 1995 “for the purpose of providing detailed, scholarly information on key topics and philosophers in all areas of philosophy.” It has a staff of 25 editors and uses approximately 200 authors, all of whom hold doctoral degrees. Like the SEP, the IEP makes use of traditional peer review, along the lines of scholarly journals, and individual articles are signed by the authors. It does occasionally, but usually not, interlink articles, so its appearance is close to that of a traditional, paper–based encyclopaedia. The IEP receives no funding, and is based on voluntary work by editors, authors and technical advisors.

Wikipedia, on the other hand, is not based on a formalized peer review process; individual articles are not written by single individuals, but collectively by distributed and usually anonymous contributors. Wikipedia’s stated policy is that the articles should express a “neutral point of view”, but there are no formal requirements as to the academic qualifications of writers. There are also no editors or boards, and new entries and articles can be entered by any interested party. Although the fact that no individual authorship exists, and that writers need not be known or formally qualified are all significant differences from the other encyclopaedias, one the most significant changes may be that the number and types of entries are not set, limited or edited. Wikipedia, then, is the only non peer–reviewed resource of those studied. As such, the comparison between Wikipedia and the other reference works may also be of some interest for the discussion of alternatives to peer review in academic journal publishing.

 

++++++++++

Methodology

As Wikipedia is huge, it is not feasible to identify every single philosopher listed, so this article is limited studying the philosophers found under the Wikipedia category “twentieth century philosophers” per 1 July 2007. For the other two resources, being more limited in size, every philosopher from the relevant period has been included, defined as philosophers who died after 1910, as those who died before that date can probably more reasonably be seen as belonging to the previous century. (Arguably, this would also be the case for some of those dying after this date, but they were in virtually all cases included in Wikipedia’s twentieth century selection, therefore this somewhat arbitrary demarcation line has been used [2]).

Once the relevant articles had been identified, information was collected on date of birth, gender, nationality, and disciplinary background of the philosophers listed. This information was then used as the basis for comparing the individuals representing twentieth century philosophy in the three encyclopaedias.

The study only made use of information found in the relevant sources, i.e., information has not been checked against “independent sources” beyond those studied. This means that some of the parameters studied may seem to be parts of a circular argument, as individuals are, for instance, roughly categorized according to “disciplinary background”; a categorization which is based on the information provided in the encyclopaedias. Since this information could in principle be partial or incorrect, and the categorization depends on information that may in fact be part of the difference between the resources. (For the entries that were listed in more than one of the resources, however, no such cases were encountered). This must be accepted as an inherent limitation of the approach chosen, but also as part of the issue studied.

One major, and perhaps the main, difference between the encyclopaedias is simply scope. Whereas the SEP at the time of study covered 60 twentieth century philosophers (with projected entries for another 88) and the IEP 49, Wikipedia listed 534 names under the entry “twentieth century philosophers.” In addition, virtually all of the names listed in the other encyclopaedias that were not found under this entry, could be found elsewhere in Wikipedia. Some, such as Iris Murdoch, seemed to not be included in the list of philosophers because they were seen to be primarily known for other reasons. Others, such as Hannah Arendt, are explicitly said to be more correctly classified under a different discipline, whereas the omission of others seemed to be merely coincidental, and a function of Wikipedia’s distributed structure, that means that no responsible editor has devised an overall policy. As it is impossible to know about the reasons for the omissions, however, these names were not included in the study.

Certain individuals listed in Wikipedia certainly are regarded as philosophers. Others might be listed in the philosophical encyclopaedias because of their contributions eventually to the discipline. This would be the case for entries for Albert Einstein and Sigmund Freud. Even so, a listing would suggest how philosophy is currently being defined in these encyclopaedias, as it suggests what kinds of work is relevant to contemporary philosophy, and what is an accepted aspect of the history of the discipline.

Since these resources are — to different degrees — dynamic, the versions current as of 1 June 2007 are in all cases used as basis for the analysis.

 

++++++++++

Results and discussion

As a first observation, we could note that the number of philosophers listed in all three resources was rather small, a total of 15 individuals. The main reason for this, however, is the relatively low rate of overlap between the two peer–reviewed resources.

Dates of birth

As shown in Table 1, there is a very pronounced difference between Wikipedia and the other encyclopaedias when it comes to when the philosophers covered were born. While the proportion of individuals born before 1900 ranges between 46.9 percent and 53.3 percent in IEP and SEP, the corresponding percentage in Wikipedia is 25.3 percent. Wikipedia also contains a significantly lower proportion (although a much higher absolute number) of philosophers born between 1900 and 1910. For every decade after 1920, however, the proportion is higher in Wikipedia, and about 10 percent of individuals listed in Wikipedia are born in the period from 1950 to 1980, from which decades neither of the other resources lists any philosophers at all.

 

Table 1: Dates of birth of twentieth century philosophers in the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (IEP),
Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (SEP) and Wikipedia.
 –19001900–1910–1920–1930–1940–1950–1960–1970–
Wikipedia121
25.3%
52
10.9%
43 9.0%63
13.2%
64
13.4%
89
18.9%
34
7.1%
10
2.1%
3
0.6%
SEP32
53.3%
12
20%
9
15%
5
8.3%
2
3.3%
0000
IEP23
46.9%
10
20.4%
3
6.1%
6
12.2%
5
10.2%
2
4.1%
000

 

For 55 of the philosophers listed in Wikipedia, no year of birth is given. This, however, seems mostly to be the case when the philosopher in question is still fairly young, and currently employed at an academic institution. These are not included in this part of the analysis, but it seems likely that their inclusion would have led a more pronounced contrast with the other two reference works. The percentages reported in Table 1 refer to the number of persons whose dates of birth are available, however.

This difference in age distribution means that Wikipedia does not, like the other reference works, contain only philosophers who are already an accepted part of the philosophical canon — it does not represent philosophers only as historical figures whom posterity have granted a right to be included in the tradition. Many of the (relatively) younger philosophers listed are major academic figures that would be familiar to most academic philosophers, such as for instance Martha Nussbaum or Fred Dretske. In that way, Wikipedia might be said to better reflect the current knowledge base and concerns of professional philosophers today, as the majority of — at least in the analytic tradition — philosophy is dealing with contemporary debates, and even work in the history of philosophy certainly refers to recent commentators.

However, a number of the entries are much more marginal figures, who are probably highly competent and widely published, but cannot be seen to be real heavyweights. It is likely that this tendency will become more pronounced as Wikipedia grows, and ever more names are added to the list. As Lih (2004) points out, one of the strengths of Wikipedia is its ability to supplement existing encyclopaedias by filling in the “knowledge gap” for the period between when news (in this case new literature) is published, and history books are written. Notably, however, this is also the explicit ambition of the SEP, and, as a matter of fact, some of the entries found in Wikipedia refer to philosophers who are so young and relatively early in their careers, that one suspects that the entries could only have been added by someone close to the person in question, or indeed by the person herself, as a form of self–advertising.

Wikipedia then, unlike IEP and SEP, presents twentieth century philosophy as a highly dynamic field, rather than as set of iconic figures. Thus, it can be said to be a more truthful representation of the state of contemporary philosophy. On the other hand, it might make it more difficult for the reader to distinguish between those who are indeed considered to be important contributors, and those who are merely competent, and in some cases, perhaps not even that.

Gender distribution

The gender distributions in the three encyclopaedias are fairly similar, the proportion of women listed ranging from 6.7 percent to 10.2 percent (see Table 2). This, however, is somewhat surprising, as Wikipedia does, as we have seen, include a number of younger philosophers on its list, and thus covers a period when the number of women in the academe has increased quite dramatically. This is not reflected in Wikipedia’s gender distribution, however. One explanation for this apparent anomaly might be that the other reference works have made conscious efforts to improve their coverage of female philosophers, so that their proportion of female philosophers is in fact an overrepresentation relative to the number of female philosophers working in the periods they cover. Another reason could be that public perceptions of philosophers reproduce traditional gender roles and patterns, and male philosophers tend to be seen as more important contributors to the field. One might also speculate that some of the younger individuals listed have added their own name to the list, in which case the gender distribution might also reflect the respective genders’ self–promotion strategies.

 

Table 2: Gender of twentieth century philosophers in the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (IEP),
Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (SEP) and Wikipedia.
 FemaleMale
Wikipedia47
8.8%
487
91.2%
SEP4
6.7%
56
93.3%
IEP5
10.2%
44
89.8%

 

Disciplines

In order to see whether the encyclopaedias differ systematically in their focus, and thus in their representation of philosophy as such, an attempt was made to categorize the listed individuals in the three encyclopaedias according to disciplinary backgrounds. This is necessarily an inexact science, but individuals were tentatively grouped into broad groups, in so far as possible without taking the substantial content of their thought into consideration. The idea was instead to group them according to institutional criteria.

The “philosophy” group encompasses any person who is reported to have trained and worked as a professional philosopher in an academic institution. The other groups contain people who either belong fully to another professional category (like Albert Einstein), or who are reported in the articles to belong to philosophy and another discipline. An example of the latter sort is the mathematician and philosopher Alfred North Whitehead. In cases where individuals are reported to belong to philosophy and another discipline, they were categorized as belonging to the other category, so as to highlight tendencies and contrasts in and between the encyclopaedias.

These other disciplines are broadly construed as “natural sciences and mathematics,” “social sciences” (including law and psychology), and “humanities” (including theology). Also included are two further — non–academic — professions. One is “writing,” a category that encompasses anything from journalism to poetry. In this category one finds individuals who have given expression to important artistic, metaphysical or political ideas, but who are not professional philosophers, nor have been used as such to any considerable degree by the later philosophical tradition. Many of these individuals could also be called “public intellectuals.” Another group has been labelled “spiritual.” In this category one finds gurus, religious mystics and other thinkers of a more spiritual inclination, that do not interact much with the academic philosophical community. Lastly, a few individual listed in Wikipedia defied any of these classifications, and these have simply been excluded them from the analysis. Examples are a British politician with a background in philosophy, and the man who invented cryonics.

It is, of course in some cases difficult to decide what category is most appropriate for a given individual, and this categorization can clearly be disputed, but on the whole, the picture that emerges should nevertheless be able to yield some information about general tendencies and differences in focus between the encyclopaedias.

 

Table 3: Disciplines of twentieth century philosophers in the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (IEP),
Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (SEP) and Wikipedia.
 SEPIEPWikipedia
Philosophy50
83.3%
34
69.4%
390
73.0%
Social sciences3
5%
4
8.2%
31
5.8%
Humanities1
1.7%
6
12.2%
39
7.3%
Math/sciences6
10%
4
8.2%
20
3.7%
Writers01
2%
26
4.9%
Spiritual0025
4.7%

 

Table 3 shows that all the resources contain a very clear majority of professional academic philosophers, with the percentages ranging from 69.4 to 83.3. When it comes to distribution into other academic disciplines, Wikipedia takes the middle position between SEP and IEP for both humanities and social sciences, but includes a somewhat lower rate of individuals from mathematics and the natural sciences. The most striking contrast between Wikipedia and the others is that Wikipedia contains a number of individuals (though a fairly small percentage) in the “spiritual” category, which does not normally interact with academic philosophy. However, referring to such individuals as philosophers reflects a fairly widespread popular usage of the word. It might still indicate that Wikipedia might also be a challenge to disciplinary boundaries as defined by professional communities. Similarly, we can see that Wikipedia contains a slightly higher percentage of “writers” and a somewhat lower proportion of individuals from the category “mathematics and natural sciences,” which might again suggest that the aggregated picture of philosophy emerging in Wikipedia is somewhat more general, and less technical, than what has been the norm in professional philosophy.

National backgrounds

Philosophers were categorized not according to official nationality (which is usually not available), nor according to country of birth, but according to where the bulk of their academic work has been carried out. This approach was chosen because the main purpose of the exercise was to find what academic cultures are being presented, rather than where individual philosophers hail from. Adherence to such a culture cannot, of course, be exactly measured, and some entries are borderline cases, where individuals have had considerable careers in more than one country, but the overall picture should still give an idea of the respective cultural profiles of the resources. Individuals who had divided their careers roughly equally (according to available information) over several countries, where classified as belonging to the one that represented the highest overall number of individuals on the list, on the hypothesis that their being listed in the encyclopaedias was more likely as an effect of belonging to a hegemonic academic culture than a smaller one. Thus, for instance, Julia Kristeva was classified as being French, and Carl Gustav Hempel as being American. Since information is often incomplete, however, and this is ultimately a matter of discretion, the classifications are in some cases probably somewhat arbitrary, and it is likely that similar cases have in some instances been classified differently. Since these faults are unlikely to be systematic, however, this should not prevent us from getting the general picture roughly right.

 

Table 4: National backgrounds of twentieth century philosophers in the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (IEP),
Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (SEP) and Wikipedia.
NationalitiesSEPIEPWikipedia
U.S.17
28.3%
13
26.5%
185
34.6%
U.K.13
21.7%
8
16.3%
108
20.2%
Germany10
16.7%
7
14.3%
35
6.6%
France11
18.3%
13
26.5%
55
10.3%
Italy0017
3.2%
Other European6
10%
5
10.2%
71
13.3%
Canada01
2.0%
13
2.4%
South America006
1.1%
Oceania1
1.7%
1
2.0%
10
1.9%
Asia2
3.3%
1
2.0%
31
5.8%
Africa003
0.6%

 

The results (see Table 4) show that the trend towards Anglo–American dominance or, more specifically, the hegemony of English–speaking countries is reinforced rather than weakened in Wikipedia. The reinforcement is due especially to the increasing proportion of American philosophers. The lower number of French and — especially — German philosophers listed in Wikipedia is probably to some degree a reflection of how the centre of the international philosophical community has shifted over the last few decades, and as such partly a consequence of the inclusion of a number of younger philosophers on the list. Wikipedia also has a slightly stronger representation of smaller European countries and other continents, but on the whole, there is no fundamental contrast to the IEP and SEP, to suggest that Wikipedia gives an alternative image of the geographical distribution of the world’s noteworthy philosophical thought. The picture presented in Wikipedia is a continuance of rather than a break with the picture of philosophical communities presented elsewhere, and does not shift the international “power balance” in philosophy.

 

++++++++++

Conclusions

This study seems to support the previous research that suggests:

  1. that Wikipedia is heavily skewed towards Western values, ideas and perceptions; and,
  2. that Wikipedia does not, on the whole, represent alternative voices or points of view.

On this background, we might say that Wikipedia does not represent the field of philosophy in a way that is fundamentally different from more traditional resources (though there might be a slight tendency toward a more “popular” understanding of the discipline). It is, however, extremely different in two respects: when it comes to the sheer number of entries, and where the age of the individuals listed is concerned. Thus, it does not present an image of an iconic, autonomous, and frozen philosophical history, but instead locates the philosophers in a messier, dynamic world, where the insides and outsides are not as clear as in traditional encyclopaedias. This happens through the inclusion of living philosophers, and “minor” philosophers, as well as a few individuals who are not universally acknowledged as being philosophers.

If a user tries to learn about philosophy from Wikipedia then, it is likely that the impression gained will be somewhat different from what would happen if the other resources were consulted. Philosophy would seem to be more of an ongoing process, and less of an established fact. As the number of entries in Wikipedia is steadily growing, this tendency is likely to become much more pronounced in the future, turning Wikipedia into a rather different kind of beast from other encyclopaedias; one that does not sit in judgment of greatness in the same way.

The very success of Wikipedia then, is also likely to mean that it is parting ways ever more visibly from more traditional sources of information. In many ways, this probably leads to what we might see as a more representative understanding of current philosophy, but it also leads to an understanding that is, in both senses of the word, less disciplined. The “quality” of Wikipedia as a reference work can therefore also be seen as a function of the entries included; or rather, its lack of exclusions. With Wikipedia, the student cannot take the mere fact of the existence of an entry as an indication of significance. Sifting through the articles in order to make a qualified assessment on the importance of the individuals and their work would take considerable time and effort. Wikipedia, then, might seem to be turning into a resource which is extremely handy for information, but that does not necessarily offer much in the way of guidance. End of article

 

About the author

Beate Elvebakk is a postdoctoral fellow at the Center for Technology, Innovation and Culture at the University of Oslo. Her current research focuses on the roles of digital publications in the humanities and natural sciences.
E–mail: beate [dot] elvebakk[at] tik [dot] uio [dot] no

 

Notes

1. Wilkinson and Huberman, 2007, p. 12.

2. Several of the philosophers on the list are listed as “nineteenth century philosophers” in Wikipedia, but with the exception of Josiah Royce, they are all also listed as twentieth century philosophers.

 

References

Colin Allen, Uri Nodelman and Edward B. Zalta, 2002. “The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: A developed dynamic reference work,” Metaphilosophy, volume 33, numbers 1–2, pp. 210–228.

F. Bellomi and R. Bonato, 2005. “Network analysis of Wikipedia,” Proceedings of Wikimania 2005 — First International Wikimedia Conference, http://www.fran.it/articles/wikimania_bellomi_bonato.pdf, accessed 15 May 2007.

Thomas Chesney, 2006. “An empirical investigation of Wikipedia’s credibility,” First Monday, volume 11, number 11, at http://journals.uic.edu/fm/article/view/1413/1331, accessed 20 January 2008.

Paul Duguid, 2006. “Limits of self–organization: Peer production and ‘laws of quality’,” First Monday, volume 11, number 10, at http://journals.uic.edu/fm/article/view/1405/1323, accessed 20 January 2008.

William Emigh and Susan C. Herring, 2005. “Collaborative authoring on the Web: A genre analysis of online encyclopedias,” Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS’05), track 4, volume 04, p. 99a.

Jim Giles, 2005. “Internet encyclopaedias go head to head,” Nature, volume 438 (15 December), pp. 900–901, at http://npg.nature.com/nature/journal/v438/n7070/full/438900a.html, accessed 20 January 2008.

Andrew Lih, 2004. “Wikipedia as participatory journalism: Reliable sources? Metrics for evaluating collaborative media as a news resource,” paper presented at the Fifth International Symposium on Online Journalism, University of Texas at Austin School of Journalism (16–17 April), at http://jmsc.hku.hk/faculty/alih/publications/utaustin-2004–wikipedia–rc2.pdf, accessed 20 January 2008.

China Martens, 2006. “Wikipedia to strive for higher quality content,” PC World (4 August), at http://pcworld.about.com/news/Aug042006id126659.htm, accessed 20 January 2008.

Finn Årup Nielsen, 2007. “Scientific citations in Wikipedia. First Monday, volume 12, number 8, at http://journals.uic.edu/fm/article/view/1997/1872, accessed 20 January 2008.

Dorothee Wiegand, 2007. “Entdeckungsreise: Digitale Enzyklopädien erklären die Welt,” c’t–Archiv, 6/2007, Seite 136, pp. 136–145.

Wikipedia, 2008. “Wikipedia”, at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia, accessed 20 January 2008.

Dennis M. Wilkinson and Bernardo A. Huberman, 2007. “Assessing the value of cooperation in Wikipedia,” First Monday, volume 12, number 4, at http://journals.uic.edu/fm/article/view/1763/1643, accessed 20 January 2008.

 

Appendix

 

Twentieth century philosophers covered in the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (IEP),
Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (SEP) and Wikipedia.
 WikipediaSEPIEPYear of birthNationalityDiscipline
Hans AchterhuisX  1942EuropePhilosophy
Marilyn McCord AdamsX  1943U.S.Philosophy
Robert Merrihew AdamsX  1937U.S.Philosophy
Jane Addams XX1860U.S.Philosophy
Mortimer AdlerX  1902U.S.Philosophy
Theodor W. AdornoXXX1903GermanPhilosophy
Giorgio AgambenX  1942ItalyPhilosophy
Virgil AldrichX  1903U.S.Philosophy
Aleksandr Danilovich AleksandrovX  1912EuropePhilosophy
Samuel AlexanderX  1859U.K.Philosophy
A.H. AlmaasX   AsiaSpiritual
William AlstonX  1921U.S.Philosophy
Louis AlthusserX  1918FrancePhilosophy
Alice AmbroseX  1906U.S.Philosophy
Günther AndersX  1902GermanyPhilosophy
Alan Ross AndersonX  1925U.S.Philosophy
G.E.M. AnscombeX  1919U.K.Philosophy
Hannah Arendt XX1906U.S.Social sciences
David Malet ArmstrongX  1926OceaniaPhilosophy
Sri AurobindoX  1872AsiaSpiritual
J.L. AustinX  1911U.K.Philosophy
Alfred AyerXX 1910U.K.Philosophy
Kent BachX   U.S.Philosophy
Gaston BachelardX  1884FrancePhilosophy
Élisabeth BadinterX  1944FrancePhilosophy
Max BaginskiX  1864U.S.Writer
Archie J. BahmX  1907U.S.Philosophy
Annette BaierX  1929OceaniaPhilosophy
Kurt BaierX  1979U.K.Philosophy
Thomas BaldwinX  1947U.K.Philosophy
Étienne BalibarX  1942FrancePhilosophy
Jonathan BarnesX  1942U.K.Philosophy
Brian BarryX  1936U.K.Philosophy
Roland BarthesX  1915FranceHumanities
Jacques BarzunX  1907FranceHumanities
Georges BatailleX  1897FranceWriter
Diderik BatensX   EuropePhilosophy
Jean BaudrillardXX 1929FranceSocial sciences
Valentin A. BazhanovX  1953EuropePhilosophy
Monroe Beardsley X 1915U.S.Philosophy
Jean BeaufretX  1907FrancePhilosophy
Simone de BeauvoirXXX1908FrancePhilosophy
Hamdija BegovicX   EuropePhilosophy
Nuel BelnapX  1930U.S.Philosophy
Seyla BenhabibX  1950U.S.Philosophy
Walter BenjaminX  1892GermanyHumanities
A.W. BennX  1843U.K.Philosophy
Jonathan BennettX  1930U.K.Philosophy
Geoffrey BenningtonX   U.K.Humanities
Nikolai BerdyaevX  1874EuropePhilosophy
Gustav BergmannX  1906U.S.Philosophy
Henri BergsonXX 1859FrancePhilosophy
Isaiah BerlinXX 1909U.K.Philosophy
Marshall BermanX  1940U.S.Social sciences
Robert BernasconiX   U.K.Philosophy
Andrew BernsteinX  1949U.S.Philosophy
Homi K. BhabhaX  1949AsiaHumanities
Harry BinswangerX  1944U.S.Philosophy
Simon BlackburnX  1944U.K.Philosophy
Maurice BlanchotX  1907FranceWriter
Brand BlanshardX  1892U.S.Philosophy
Ned BlockX  1942U.S.Philosophy
Maurice Blondel  X1861FranceHumanities
Howard BloomX  1943U.S.Other
Andy BlundenX  1945OceaniaPhilosophy
Hilary BokX   U.S.Philosophy
Egon BondyX  1930EuropePhilosophy
Dietrich Bonhoeffer  X1906GermanyHumanities
Laurence BonJourX   U.S.Philosophy
Bernard Bosanquet X 1848U.K.Philosophy
Pierre BourdieuX  1930FranceSocial sciences
F.H. BradleyXX 1846U.K.Philosophy
Robert BrandomX  1950U.S.Philosophy
Michael BratmanX  1945U.S.Philosophy
Geoffrey BrennanX   OceaniaPhilosophy
Franz BrentanoXX 1848GermanyPhilosophy
Stephen BronnerX  1947U.S.Social sciences
L.E.J. Brouwer X 1881EuropeScience
James Robert BrownX   CanadaPhilosophy
Martin BuberXX 1848EuropePhilosophy
Tyler BurgeX  1946U.S.Philosophy
Judith ButlerX  1956U.S.Philosophy
J. Baird CallicottX  1941U.S.Philosophy
Albert CamusX X1913FranceWriter
Hanneke CantersX  1969EuropePhilosophy
Georg CantorX  1845GermanyScience
Rudolf CarnapX X1891GermanyPhilosophy
Nancy CartwrightX  1943U.S.Philosophy
Ernst CassirerXX 1874GermanyPhilosophy
Hector–Neri CastañedaX  1924South AmericaPhilosophy
Cornelius CastoriadisX  1922FrancePhilosophy
David ChalmersX  1966OceaniaPhilosophy
Paul ChamberlainX   CanadaPhilosophy
Debiprasad ChattopadhyayaX  1918AsiaPhilosophy
G.K. ChestertonX  1874U.K.Writer
Roderick ChisholmX  1916U.S.Philosophy
Noam ChomskyX  1928U.S.Humanities
Andrea ChristofidouX   U.K.Philosophy
Patricia ChurchlandX  1943CanadaPhilosophy
Paul ChurchlandX  1942CanadaPhilosophy
Emil CioranX  1911EuropePhilosophy
Hélène CixousX  1937FranceHumanities
Kenneth ClatterbaughX   U.S.Philosophy
Gerald CohenX  1941U.K.Social sciences
Joshua CohenX  1951U.S.Philosophy
Lucio CollettiX  1924ItalyPhilosophy
R.G. Collingwood X 1889U.K.Philosophy
André Comte–SponvilleX  1952FrancePhilosophy
David ConwayX  1947U.K.Philosophy
Ananda CoomaraswamyX  1877U.S.Humanities
Tenzin Gyatso, 14th Dalai LamaX  1935AsiaSpiritual
Jonathan DancyX  1946U.K.Philosophy
Arthur DantoX  1924U.S.Humanities
Surendranath DasguptaX  1887AsiaPhilosophy
Donald DavidsonXXX1917U.S.Philosophy
Brian DaviesX  1951U.K.Philosophy
Guy DebordX  1931FranceWriter
Gilles DeleuzeX X1925FrancePhilosophy
Daniel DennettX  1942U.S.Philosophy
Jacques DerridaXXX1930FrancePhilosophy
Friedrich DessauerX  1871GermanyScience
Michael DevittX   OceaniaPhilosophy
John DeweyXXX1859U.S.Philosophy
Peter DewsX  1952U.K.Philosophy
Sousa DiasX  1956EuropePhilosophy
Hugo DinglerX  1881GermanyScience
Fred DretskeX  1932U.S.Philosophy
Michael Dummett  X1925U.K.Philosophy
Pierre Lecomte du NoüyX  1883FrancePhilosophy
Curt John DucasseX  1881U.S.Philosophy
William A. EarleX  1919U.S.Philosophy
Umberto EcoX  1932ItalyHumanities
Albert Einstein X 1879U.S.Science
Dorothy EdgingtonX   U.K.Philosophy
Mircea EliadeX  1907EuropeHumanities
Ignacio Ellacuría  X1930EuropePhilosophy
Robert EttingerX  1918U.S.Other
Gareth EvansX  1946U.K.Philosophy
Ahmad FardidX  1939AsiaPhilosophy
Feng YoulanX  1895AsiaPhilosophy
Michael FerejohnX   U.S.Philosophy
Paul FeyerabendXX 1924U.S.Philosophy
Arthur FindlayX  1883U.K.Spiritual
Arthur FineX  1937U.S.Philosophy
Alain FinkielkrautX  1939FranceHumanities
Guy FinleyX  1949U.S.Spiritual
John FinnisX  1940U.S.Philosophy
Antony FlewX  1923U.K.Philosophy
Pavel FlorenskyX  1882EuropeHumanities
Luciano FloridiX   ItalyPhilosophy
Vilém FlusserX  1920EuropePhilosophy
Jerry FodorX  1935U.S.Science
Philippa FootX  1920U.K.Philosophy
Michel FoucaultXXX1926FranceHumanities
Gary L. FrancioneX  1954U.S.Social sciences
Charles FrankelX  1917U.S.Philosophy
Harry FrankfurtX  1929U.S.Philosophy
Oliver FranksX  1905U.K.Philosophy
Gottlob FregeXXX1848GermanyScience
Sigmund FreudX X1856EuropeSocial sciences
Sadayoshi FukudaX  1917AsiaPhilosophy
Hans–Georg GadamerXX 1900GermanyPhilosophy
Mahatma GandhiX  1869AsiaWriter
Rodolphe GaschéX   GermanyHumanities
David GauthierX  1932U.S.Philosophy
Peter GeachX  1916U.K.Philosophy
Ernest GellnerX  1925U.K.Social sciences
Giovanni GentileX  1875ItalyPhilosophy
Edmund GettierX  1927U.S.Philosophy
Raymond GeussX  1946U.S.Philosophy
Sholom GhermanX  1920EuropePhilosophy
Allan GibbardX  1942U.S.Philosophy
Juozas GirniusX  1915EuropePhilosophy
Jonathan GloverX   U.K.Philosophy
Kurt GödelXX 1906EuropeScience
Ivan O. GodfroidX  1971EuropeSocial sciences
Alvin GoldmanX  1938U.S.Philosophy
Nelson GoodmanXX 1906U.S.Philosophy
Lewis GordonX  1962U.S.Philosophy
Allan GotthelfX  1942U.S.Philosophy
Antonio GramsciX  1891ItalySocial sciences
George GrantX  1918CanadaPhilosophy
John N. GrayX  1948U.K.Philosophy
A.C. GraylingX  1949U.K.Philosophy
Celia GreenX  1935U.K.Philosophy
Kurt GrellingX  1886GermanyPhilosophy
Paul GriceXX 1913U.K.Philosophy
Richard GrossmanX   U.S.Social sciences
Jean GuittonX  1901FranceHumanities
D.V. GundappaX  1887AsiaWriter
Aron GurwitschX  1901U.S.Philosophy
Susan HaackX  1945U.K.Philosophy
Jürgen HabermasX  1929GermanyPhilosophy
Ian HackingX  1936CanadaPhilosophy
Paul HaeberlinX  1878EuropePhilosophy
David F. HaightX  1941U.S.Philosophy
Werner HamacherX  1948GermanyHumanities
Norwood Russell HansonX  1924U.S.Philosophy
R.M. HareX  1919U.K.Philosophy
Gilbert HarmanX  1938U.S.Philosophy
Horace Romano HarréX  1927OceaniaPhilosophy
Errol HarrisX  1908AfricaPhilosophy
H.L.A. HartX  1907U.K.Philosophy
Robert S. HartmanX  1910U.S.Philosophy
Charles HartshorneXX 1897U.S.Philosophy
Jacques HassounX  1936FrancePhilosophy
Seiichi HatanoX  1877AsiaPhilosophy
John HaugelandX  1945U.S.Philosophy
John HawthorneX   U.S.Philosophy
Friedrich HayekX  1899U.K.Science
Martin HeideggerX X1889GermanyPhilosophy
Erich HellerX  1911U.K.Humanities
Carl Gustav Hempel  X1905U.S.Philosophy
Vincent F. HendricksX  1970EuropePhilosophy
Michel HenryX  1922U.S.Philosophy
Finngeir HiorthX  1928EuropePhilosophy
Jerry HobbsX  1942U.S.Science
Shadworth Hodgson  X1832U.K.Philosophy
Eric HofferX  1902U.S.Writer
Douglas HofstadterX  1945U.S.Science
Richard HönigswaldX  1875EuropePhilosophy
Max HorkheimerX  1895GermanySocial sicences
Jennifer HornsbyX  1951U.K.Philosophy
Vernon HowardX  1918U.S.Spiritual
Edmund HusserlXXX1859GermanyPhilosophy
Jean HyppoliteX  1907FrancePhilosophy
Ivan IlyinX  1883EuropePhilosophy
Roman IngardenXX 1893EuropePhilosophy
Inoue TetsujiroX  1855AsiaPhilosophy
Muhammad IqbalX  1877AsiaWriter
Luce IrigarayX X1930EuropeHumanities
Frank Cameron JacksonX  1943OceaniaPhilosophy
William JamesXX 1842U.S.Philosophy
Karl Jaspers X 1883GermanyPhilosophy
Jin YuelinX  1895ChinaPhilosophy
C.E.M. JoadX  1891U.K.Philosophy
Subhash KakX  1947U.S.Science
Bhau KalchuriX  1926AsiaWriter
Eugene KamenkaX  1928OceaniaPhilosophy
Milan KangrgaX  1923EuropePhilosophy
David KaplanX  1933U.S.Philosophy
Aron KatsenelinboigenX  1927U.S.Social sciences
Walter KaufmannX  1921U.S.Philosophy
Gopinath KavirajX  1887AsiaSpiritual
Sam KeenX   U.S.Philosophy
Anthony KennyX  1931U.K.Philosophy
Jaegwon KimX  1934U.S.Philosophy
Yasuhiko KimuraX  1954U.S.Spiritual
Peter J. KingX  1956U.K.Philosophy
Mark KingwellX  1963CanadaPhilosophy
Philip KitcherX  1947U.K.Philosophy
Ladislav KlímaX  1878EuropePhilosophy
Hans KöchlerX  1948EuropePhilosophy
Sarah KofmanX  1934FrancePhilosophy
Alexandre Kojève  X1902FrancePhilosophy
David KolbX  1941U.S.Philosophy
Christine KorsgaardX  1952U.S.Philosophy
Saul KripkeX  1940U.S.Philosophy
Jiddu KrishnamurtiX  1895U.S.Spiritual
Julia KristevaX  1941FrancePhilosophy
Georg KühlewindX  1924EuropeSpiritual
T.S. KuhnX  1922U.S.Philosophy
Deepak KumarX   U.S.Social sciences
Leo KuperX  1908U.S.Social sciences
Jacques LacanX X1901FranceSocial sciences
Philippe Lacoue–LabartheX  1940FrancePhilosophy
Imre LakatosX  1922U.S.Philosophy
Susanne LangerX  1895U.S.Philosophy
Stephen LaurenceX   U.K.Philosophy
Michèle Le DœuffX  1948FrancePhilosophy
Jean–Louis Le MoigneX  1931FrancePhilosophy
Ernest LeporeX   U.S.Philosophy
Henri LefebvreX  1901FranceSocial sciences
Claude LefortX  1924FrancePhilosophy
Brian LeiterX  1963U.S.Philosophy
Robin LePoidevinX   U.K.Philosophy
Claude Lévi–StraussX  1908FranceSocial sciences
Emmanuel LévinasXX 1906FrancePhilosophy
Clarence Irving LewisX X1883U.S.Philosophy
David Kellogg LewisX  1941U.S.Philosophy
Suzanne LilarX  1901EuropeWriter
Alphonso LingisX  1933U.S.Philosophy
Theodor LippsX  1851GermanyPhilosophy
Peter LiptonX  1954U.K.Philosophy
Knud Ejler LøgstrupX  1905EuropeHumanities
Loren LomaskyX   U.S.Philosophy
Bernard Lonergan  X1944CanadaHumanities
Helen LonginoX  1944U.S.Philosophy
Paul LorenzenX  1915GermanyPhilosophy
Carlo LottieriX  1960ItalyPhilosophy
John LucasX  1929U.K.Philosophy
Peter LudlowX  1957U.S.Philosophy
Rosa LuxemburgX  1870GermanyWriter
William LycanX  1945U.S.Philosophy
Jean–François LyotardX X1924FranceHumanities
Tibor R. MachanX  1939U.S.Philosophy
Alasdair MacIntyreX X1929U.K.Philosophy
John MacmurrayX  1891U.K.Philosophy
J.M.E. McTaggartX  1866U.K.Philosophy
Tony McWalterX  1945U.K.Other
Penelope MaddyX   U.S.Philosophy
Ramana MaharshiX  1879AsiaSpiritual
David B. MalamentX   U.S.Philosophy
Ernst Mally X 1879EuropePhilosophy
Paul de ManX  1919EuropeHumanities
Gabriel MarcelXX 1889GermanyPhilosophy
Ruth Barcan MarcusX  1921U.S.Philosophy
Herbert MarcuseX  1898U.S.Philosophy
Ludwig MarcuseX  1894GermanyPhilosophy
Jacques MaritainXX 1882FrancePhilosophy
Richard Milton MartinX  1916U.S.Philosophy
Julián MaríasX  1914EuropePhilosophy
Reinhart MaurerX  1935GermanyPhilosophy
Ali MazruiX  1933U.S.Philosophy
Herbert McCabeX  1926U.K.Humanities
Ron McClamrockX   U.S.Philosophy
John McDowellX  1942U.K.Philosophy
Colin McGinnX  1950U.K.Philosophy
Marshall McLuhanX  1911CanadaHumanities
George Herbert Mead  X1863U.S.Philosophy
Alexius MeinongX  1853EuropePhilosophy
Hugh MellorX  1938U.K.Philosophy
Maurice Merleau–PontyXX 1908FrancePhilosophy
Thomas MetzingerX  1958GermanyPhilosophy
Leonard B. MeyerX  1918U.S.Humanities
Emile Meyerson  X1859FranceScience
Mary MidgleyX  1919U.K.Philosophy
David MillerX  1942U.K.Philosophy
Ruth MillikanX  1933U.S.Philosophy
Brian J. MistlerX   U.S.Social sciences
William Mitchell  X1861U.K.Philosophy
Dimitrije MitrinovicX  1887EuropeWriter
Richard MontagueX  1930U.S.Philosophy
William Pepperell MontagueX  1873U.S.Philosophy
George Edward MooreXXX1873U.K.Philosophy
Sidney MorgenbesserX  1921U.S.Philosophy
Edgar MorinX  1921FrancePhilosophy
Thomas V. MorrisX   U.S.Philosophy
Gaetano MoscaX  1858ItalySocial sciences
V.Y. MudimbeX  1941U.S.Humanities
Ferid MuhicX  1944EuropePhilosophy
Max MüllerX  1906GermanyPhilosophy
Stephen MumfordX  1965U.K.Philosophy
Iris Murdoch X 1919U.K.Philosophy
Arne NæssX  1912EuropePhilosophy
Thomas NagelX  1937U.S.Philosophy
Jean–Luc NancyX X1940FrancePhilosophy
M. NasroenX X AsiaPhilosophy
Paul G. Natorp X 1854GermanyPhilosophy
Stephen NealeX X U.S.Philosophy
Antonio NegriX  1933ItalyPhilosophy
Oskar NegtX  1934GermanyPhilosophy
Otto NeurathX  1882EuropePhilosophy
Fred NewmanX  1935U.S.Social sciences
Nishida Kitarô X 1870AsiaPhilosophy
Nel NoddingsX  1929U.S.Social sciences
Robert NozickX X1938U.S.Philosophy
Martha NussbaumX  1947U.S.Philosophy
Michael OakeshottX  1901U.K.Philosophy
George OhsawaX  1893AsiaSpiritual
Onora O’NeillX  1941U.K.Philosophy
Michel OnfrayX  1959FrancePhilosophy
Walter J. OngX  1912U.S.Humanities
José Ortega y GassetX  1883EuropePhilosophy
Rudolf OttoX  1869GermanyHumanities
Albert OutlerX  1908U.S.Humanities
Henry PachterX  1907U.S.Humanities
Tommaso PalamidessiX  1915ItalySpiritual
Raimon PanikkarX  1918EuropePhilosophy
David PapineauX  1947AfricaPhilosophy
ParamanandaX  1884U.S.Spiritual
Vilfredo ParetoX  1848FranceSocial sciences
James Leonard ParkX  1941U.S.Writer
Christopher PeacockeX  1950U.K.Philosophy
Giuseppe PeanoX  1858ItalyScience
David PearceX   U.K.Philosophy
Leonard PeikoffX  1933U.S.Philosophy
Charles PeirceXXX1839U.S.Philosophy
Carlo PencoX  1948ItalyPhilosophy
Mario PerniolaX  1941ItalyPhilosophy
Ralph Barton PerryX  1876U.S.Philosophy
Leon PetrazyckiX  1867EuropePhilosophy
D.Z. PhillipsX  1934U.K.Philosophy
Jean PiagetX  1896EuropeSocial sciences
Giovanni PianaX  1940ItalyPhilosophy
Ullin PlaceX  1924U.K.Philosophy
Alvin PlantingaX  1932U.S.Philosophy
Thomas PoggeX   U.S.Philosophy
Jules Henri Poincaré  X1854FranceScience
Michael PolanyiX  1891U.K.Science
Georges PolitzerX  1903FrancePhilosophy
Leonardo PoloX  1926EuropePhilosophy
K.J. PopmaX  1903EuropePhilosophy
Karl PopperXX 1902U.K.Philosophy
Graham PriestX  1948U.K.Philosophy
Arthur Prior X 1914OceaniaPhilosophy
Millan PuellesX  1921EuropePhilosophy
Pujya MotaX  1898AsiaSpiritual
Hilary PutnamX  1926U.S.Philosophy
Andrew PyleX  1955U.K.Philosophy
Zenon PylyshynX  1937CanadaScience
Willard Van Orman QuineX  1908U.S.Philosophy
Eduardo RabossiX  1930South AmericaPhilosophy
James RachelsX  1941U.S.Philosophy
Janet Radcliffe RichardsX  1944U.K.Philosophy
Sarvepalli RadhakrishnanX X1888AsiaPhilosophy
Constantin Radulescu–MotruX  1868EuropePhilosophy
Cattamanchi Ramalinga ReddyX  1880AsiaSocial sciences
Frank P. RamseyX  1903U.K.Science
Ayn RandX X1905U.S.Philosophy
John RawlsX X1921U.S.Philosophy
Serge Raynaud de la FerriereX  1916FranceSpiritual
Carveth ReadX  1848U.K.Philosophy
Edward S. ReedX  1954U.S.Philosophy
Hans ReichenbachX X1891GermanyPhilosophy
Nicholas RescherX  1928U.S.Philosophy
William J. RichardsonX   U.S.Philosophy
Radovan RichtaX  1924EuropePhilosophy
Paul Ricoeur XX1913FrancePhilosophy
Alois RiehlX  1844EuropePhilosophy
Arturo Andrés RoigX  1922South AmericaPhilosophy
Holmes Rolston IIIX  1932U.S.Philosophy
Francisco RomeroX  1891South AmericaPhilosophy
Richard RortyXXX1931U.S.Philosophy
Stephen David RossX  1935U.S.Philosophy
Tamar RossX   AsiaPhilosophy
W.D. RossX  1877U.K.Philosophy
Gian–Carlo RotaX  1932U.S.Science
Louis RougierX  1899FrancePhilosophy
Josiah Royce X 1855U.S.Philosophy
Bertrand RussellXX 1872U.K.Philosophy
Tomas RyalX  1900EuropeWriter
Alan RyanX  1940U.K.Philosophy
Gilbert RyleX  1900U.K.Philosophy
Mark SainsburyX  1943U.K.Philosophy
John SallisX  1938U.S.Philosophy
Nathan SalmonX  1951U.S.Philosophy
David H. SanfordX   U.S.Philosophy
Gianfranco SanguinettiX   ItalyWriter
Heron SantanaX  1962South AmericaSocial sciences
George SantayanaXXX1863U.S.Philosophy
Jean–Paul SartreXXX1905FrancePhilosophy
John Ralston SaulX  1947CanadaWriter
Fernando SavaterX  1947EuropePhilosophy
Geoffrey Sayre–McCordX  1946U.S.Philosophy
T.M. ScanlonX  1940U.S.Philosophy
Theodore SchickX   U.S.Philosophy
Jonael SchicklerX  1976U.K.Philosophy
Ferdinand Canning Scott SchillerX  1864U.K.Philosophy
Hubert SchleichertX   EuropePhilosophy
Moritz SchlickX  1882GermanyPhilosophy
Tad SchmaltzX   U.S.Philosophy
David SchmidtzX   U.S.Philosophy
Michael ScholarX  1942U.K.Philosophy
Alfred Schutz XX1899EuropePhilosophy
Roger ScrutonX  1944U.K.Philosophy
John SearleX  1932U.S.Philosophy
Wilfrid SellarsXX 1912U.S.Philosophy
Semen L. FrankX  1877EuropeHumanities
Michel SerresX  1930FrancePhilosophy
Neven SesardicX  1949EuropePhilosophy
Michel SeymourX   CanadaPhilosophy
Jeremy J. ShapiroX  1940U.S.Philosophy
Stewart ShapiroX  1951U.S.Philosophy
Scott ShawX  1948U.S.Spiritual
Vandana ShivaX  1952AsiaSocial sciences
Gustav Shpet  X1879EuropePhilosophy
Eli SiegelX  1902U.S.Writer
Gilbert SimondonX  1924FrancePhilosophy
Peter SimonsX  1950U.K.Philosophy
Peter SingerX  1946OceaniaPhilosophy
B.F. SkinnerX  1904U.S.Social sciences
John SkorupskiX  1946U.K.Philosophy
Brian SkyrmsX   U.S.Philosophy
J.J.C. SmartX  1920U.K.Philosophy
Barry SmithX  1952U.K.Philosophy
Michael A. SmithX  1954OceaniaPhilosophy
Quentin SmithX   U.S.Philosophy
Tara SmithX   U.S.Philosophy
Jan SmutsX  1870AfricaSocial sciences
Joseph D. SneedX   U.S.Science
Alan SobleX  1947U.S.Philosophy
Philippe SollersX  1936FranceHumanities
Kate SoperX   U.K.Philosophy
Andrew SpencerX  1936U.S.Writer
Herbert SpiegelbergX  1904U.S.Philosophy
Timothy L.S. SpriggeX  1932U.K.Philosophy
Robert StalnakerX   U.S.Philosophy
Jason StanleyX  1969U.S.Philosophy
Edith SteinX  1891U.S.Philosophy
Rudolf SteinerX  1861EuropePhilosophy
William SternX  1871GermanySocial sciences
Leonid StolovichX  1929EuropePhilosophy
Leo StraussX  1889U.S.Philosophy
P.F. StrawsonX  1919U.K.Philosophy
Penmetsa SubbarajuX   AsiaWriter
Sun Yat–senX  1866AsiaPhilosophy
Ivan SupekX  1915EuropeScience
Patrick SuppesX  1922U.S.Philosophy
Daisetz Teitaro SuzukiX  1870AsiaSpiritual
Swami RamdasX  1884AsiaSpiritual
Richard SwinburneX  1934U.K.Philosophy
Pierre–André TaguieffX  1946FranceSocial sciences
Alfred TarskiXX 1902U.S.Science
Jacob TaubesX  1923GermanyHumanities
Charles TaylorX  1931CanadaPhilosophy
Richard TaylorX  1919U.S.Philosophy
Ioannis TheodorakopoulosX  1900EuropePhilosophy
Judith Jarvis ThomsonX  1929U.S.Philosophy
Tzvetan TodorovX  1939FranceHumanities
Stephen ToulminX  1922U.K.Philosophy
Sergei Nikolaevich TrubetskoyX  1863EuropePhilosophy
James Hayden TuftsX  1862U.S.Philosophy
Alan TuringXX 1912U.S.Philosophy
Miguel de UnamunoX  1864EuropeWriter
Erich UngerX  1887U.K.Philosophy
Hans VaihingerX  1852GermanyPhilosophy
Paul ValéryX  1871FranceWriter
Bas van FraassenX  1941EuropePhilosophy
Philippe Van ParijsX  1951EuropePhilosophy
Peter VardyX   U.K.Humanities
Nicla VassalloX  1963ItalyPhilosophy
Gianni VattimoX  1936ItalyPhilosophy
Henry Babcock VeatchX  1911U.S.Philosophy
Karel VerleyeX  1920EuropePhilosophy
Swami VivekanandaX  1863AsiaSpiritual
Marc de VriesX  1958EuropePhilosophy
Richard WahleX  1857EuropePhilosophy
Frank R. WallaceX  1932U.S.Writer
Keith WardX  1938U.K.Humanities
Mary WarnockX  1924U.K.Philosophy
Watsuji Tetsurô X 1889AsiaPhilosophy
Alan WattsX  1915U.K.Spiritual
Wei Wu WeiX  1895U.K.Spiritual
Simone WeilX  1909FranceSpiritual
Max WeismannX   U.S.Philosophy
Cornel WestX  1953U.S.Humanities
Alfred North WhiteheadXXX1861U.K.Science
Phillip H. WiebeX  1945CanadaPhilosophy
David WigginsX  1933U.K.Philosophy
Bernard WilliamsXX 1929U.K.Philosophy
Timothy WilliamsonX  1955U.K.Philosophy
John WisdomX  1904U.K.Philosophy
Ludwig WittgensteinXXX1889U.K.Philosophy
Herbert WitzenmannX  1905GermanySpiritual
Susan WolfX  1952U.S.Philosophy
Robert Paul WolffX   U.S.Philosophy
Nicholas WolterstorffX  1932U.S.Humanities
David WoodX  1946U.K.Philosophy
Frederick James Eugene WoodbridgeX  1867U.S.Philosophy
Crispin WrightX  1942U.K.Philosophy
Wilhelm Maximilian Wundt X 1832GermanySocial sciences
Joaquin Xirau PalauX  1895EuropePhilosophy
Iris Marion YoungX  1949U.S.Philosophy
María ZambranoX  1904EuropeWriter
Peter Wessel ZapffeX  1899EuropeWriter
Ernst ZermeloX  1871GermanyScience
Paul ZiffX  1920U.S.Philosophy
Aleksandr ZinovyevX  1922EuropePhilosophy
Slavoj ZizekX X1949EuropeSocial sciences
Volker ZotzX  1956EuropeSpiritual
Estanislao ZuletaX  1935South AmericaPhilosophy
Total5346049   

 

 


Editorial history

Paper received 16 January 2008; accepted 22 January 2008.


Copyright © 2008, First Monday.

Copyright © 2008, Beate Elvebakk.

Philosophy democratized? A comparison between Wikipedia and two other Web–based philosophy resources
by Beate Elvebakk
First Monday, Volume 13, Number 2 - 4 February 2008
http://journals.uic.edu/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2091/1938





A Great Cities Initiative of the University of Illinois at Chicago University Library.

© First Monday, 1995-2015.