This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Strongly disagree on the merger.
I agree that the article is a lame stub, but I disagree that it should be merged into virtual community. The two are fundamentally different:
(a) virtual community is about interpersonal relationships online. Howard Rheingold's The Virtual Community (rev ed, 2000) is an exemplary discussion, although the concept was around earlier. Typically, it is studied through ethnographic observation or surveying
(b) A web community (as the definition says here) is about inter-web page relationships, a fundamentally different thing. (The pages might be corporate for example.) Duncan Watts' research is the exemplary discussion here. Typically it is studied through bots discovering linkages and structure in the web.
Merger proposal: Web community -> Online communityEdit
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
To merge Web community into Online community. Klbrain (talk) 06:12, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
The reason why I started this discussion is, to be honest, primarily not an interest in the articles. There many different solutions are satisfactory. I really just care for one thing: the category Category:Virtual communities, which I think should be renamed to Online communities. I need YOUR help here--you are familiar with the topic. For that to sort out we need to answer some questions: Which proportion of virtual communities are online? The only counter-example I can think of are letter-based communities--extremely rare nowadays. Basically the question is: Is virtual communities a subtopic of online communities or the other way round?
And even if this is sorted out, the far more important analysis for the decision on how to name the category is the following: "which proportion of the subcategories of Category:Virtual (soon to be renamed to Online) communities do we identify as either pure Online/Virtual communities. I argue the majority of the sub-content are online communities. CN1 (talk) 13:48, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
I'm proposing to merge this article, Web community, into the Online community article. Most online communities are web communities and web communities can, are and should be described in there anyway so I don't see why there should be an additional page (with some duplicate info).
Note that the other merge-proposal on this talk page above this section is about merging it with virtual community - yet another (superordinary) concept. --Fixuture (talk) 00:27, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
Support. I agree that we don't need both. I feel that the word online sounds better, more modern, and more inclusive than the word web, though that's just my personal opinion.
The other article you mention, Virtual community, might also be considered. Its lead says "Some of the most pervasive virtual communities are online communities operating under social networking services.", and a couple of historical examples of "virtual" communities are mentioned.
Internet forum (aka message board) is a fairly well-developed article with a great deal of overlap with these others.
Official proposal maybe. @Hordaland: Let us work together and take this to Cfd (categories for discussion), where we can make the merge official or at least discuss our issue. Maybe @Fixuture: is on board aswell. Check this sentence on Online communities: "Commonly, people communicate through social networking sites, chat rooms, forums, e-mail lists and discussion boards. People may also join online communities through video games, blogs and virtual worlds." This is exactly the same definition as Virtual communities. Also, I checked the whole article on Virtual communities and for EVERY SINGLE exaple of a vc, the participants have to be online. Either we are that dumb, or the difference is that small. I think the fourth user, who is on our side on this, is @Joshua Issac:. I also tagged Virtual communities accordingly yet, to draw more attention to this, because I know, that the talk-page is usually V E R Y deserted. CN1 (talk) 01:14, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Support - I agree with a merge between these three articles. As it stands, virtual community focuses on online communities. While it is certainly possible for a virtual community to exist offline, such as one that communicates through letters, these are not addressed in the current article, so it is not appropriate to have a separate article for it. Online community would be the most appropriate target for the content. I have updated the tags on the pages to merge-related ones because CfDs are for categories. --Joshua Issac (talk) 13:54, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
@Dreamyshade:. You might be happy to see me continuing your discussion. Sorry to start a new section, but naming the first one "untitled" unfortunately made me skip it. @Bellagio99:, you wrote: "virtual community is about interpersonal relationships online". But where does it say, that "Online community" is not exactly that aswell? Look at [this list] and tell me how you describe these communities. As online or virtual communities. I doubt there is actual data about which term is more common, so we have to think about how often we come across these terms. Personally, I feel "online community" much more often used in the world outside of academia. Where does "virtual communities" occur? In a very small number of studies maybe. CN1 (talk) 12:48, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
Quoting an IP from another discussion: "Online Community (phrased in the wikipedia as 'virtual community,' but whatever) is the title where people would normally look for something like this, and rightly so. By merging, the information remains intact, and it may spur even more work on this and all the rest of the Virtual Community article. Organizational streamlining, if you will -- simplify the hunt." @Sunray: sympathized with that anonymous. This discussion could be relevant for @Cretog8: & @Jonathanbishop:.
Joshua Isaac writes: "The article makes a distinction between virtual and online communities. Virtual community#Introduction notes that virtual communities also include communities whose members interact with each other via letters, in addition to online communities. However, most of the article then deals with the subject as though online communities are the only virtual communities. I suggest moving most of the content that only applies to online communities to the article on that subject, and keeping at this article only information that is relevant to virtual communities in general, except in sections that address particular types of virtual community; for example, a section for online communities, and another for letter-based communities." CN1 (talk) 13:31, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
Read the 'My IMPETUS' section pleaseCN1 (talk) 13:50, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
Support - The definitions of these two terms overlap so much that anywhere you split seems hard to justify. Jdfoote (talk) 17:41, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
Support There should be a merger of content in web community, online community, and virtual community. While there are differences in the meaning of web, online, and virtual, the content of the articles themselves covers the same concept. I prefer "online" as the one place to merge because online has more of a meaning of connected to Internet regardless of whether one is in a virtual space. Because of that, "online" seems like the most general term for the most general concept including communities entirely in virtual spaces versus a community where people meet both in virtual spaces and in person, as is the case with many social media communities. Bluerasberry (talk) 20:07, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
Support - Overlapping coverage. No need for separate articles. ~Kvng (talk) 17:04, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.