Prueba para flyers

Prueba para flyers

Our study finds that Wikipedia can successfully deal with disagreement over the trustworthiness of sources in contexts of political polarization. We believe that three affordances of Wikipedia are likely responsible. First, that it is a true online community, one that relies on shared values linked to the encyclopedic nature of the project [@gonzalezmama2023]. Second, that its users form a social hierarchy in which social capital is unequally distributed and those who have committed time and effort to the collective endeavor are often acknowledged a higher status followed by heightened editing privileges and prerogatives [@benkler2006, 396; @oneil2011]. Third, that defining what is trustworthy or not depends on a rather nuanced principle on reliable sources, that makes discussing what is reliable or not possible and fruitful ^[@wiki_reliable. We thank this observation to Vladimir Garay.]. We find strong evidence of the relevance of the first element—present in the discussion pages we analyzed—and somewhat weaker evidence of the second one, where there is no significant correlation between editing participation and enjoying high editing privileges.