Classifying Eugenics: A “Wandering Subject” moves to Wikipedia

Abstract

Classification systems structure access to information and shape users’ experiences of knowledge infrastructures. Classification decisions can reveal how a subject is understood and tensions surrounding this understanding at a particular moment in time. These tensions can be revealed in the portrayal and communication of subjects that are contentious and deeply political. This is the case with Eugenics, a topic that has been debated, understood, and evolved over the past two hundred years. Its treatment in traditional classification systems, particularly Dewey Decimal Classification have revealed its changing meanings over time. Such tensions in meaning over time are especially evident in classification treatments of boundary-objects. As Bowker and Star note, boundary-object pose a challenge to traditional classification systems because they embody multiple meanings for different disciplines and cannot be classed into one subject. Boundary-objects do not fit into neat boxes and those who manage the irregularities across discipline knowledge and definitions are making and reshaping these understandings are structuring user interactions with the subject. Studying boundary-object in different classification systems help us to understand how information is being structured and what tensions exist in negotiating this system. In the case of eugenics, classifications over time have demonstrated tensions and evolving understandings. Previous work on subject ontogeny and the Dewey Decimal Classification has revealed a pattern of reassigning or removing “eugenics” as a classified subject. Many of these changes to the Dewey Decimal Classification correspond with evolving popular political and social opinions of the period. Eugenics’ contentious history provides an interesting challenge to understanding how we assign meaning to information. This thesis examines the Wikipedia Eugenics article, edits, and talk pages to develop a case study in order to investigate how subject classifications and description evolves over time. This project specifically seeks to understand what systems of power can be revealed in about the continued marginalization of underrepresented and minority voices in classification. In addition, because of the accessibility of Wikipedia’s collaborative online editing and resulting articles, this case study creates room to examine how we make sense of information and disinformation online while editors negotiate tensions between viewpoints in the editing process. The case study was developed through a series of qualitative coding of the Wikipedia article and talk pages from 2004 to 2019. Codes were used to draw out recurrent themes throughout the editing history of the eugenics article and develop a grounded theory of classification work in this space. In doing so, this research helps to inform the long history of subject classification and its ability to uphold systems of power.