Earlier this year, I realised that there was no Wikipedia page for ‘research culture’. I was surprised by the omission, but I probably shouldn’t have been. English Wikipedia’s coverage is huge, but it isn’t perfect.

So, I set out to write a page that would provide some bare bones for people to build on. On 6 October 2025, during the Community in Writing symposium, I made it live.

You can see it here: Research culture on Wikipedia

It’s not very good, but it is a start. I think that it needs more details in lots of different areas. Research culture is a type of organisational culture, but it also sits within disciplines (which sit outside of organisations). I think that when governments talk about ‘research culture’ they probably mean different things to what universities mean and what academics mean when they talk about it. There is a lot more that could be said about research culture from a post-colonial point of view, from a feminist point of view, from an open research point of view. Some of the stuff that I’ve put there probably should be trimmed.

A request for help

This article would be much stronger if other people contributed to it. If you are interested in this topic, you might want to help. There are several different ways that you could contribute.

You could fix what is already there. Adding a better reference, or fixing a typo is a simple way to get started. Deleting something that isn’t relevant is also helpful.

You could add something new. As I said, there is a lot that is missing from this article. Different theoretical stances, different understandings of the topic, different case studies. All of these could be added.

You could discuss possible improvements on the Talk page. Each Wikipedia page has a place for discussing that page. Most Talk pages are empty. Some host very lively debates. If you have a thought, or a question, then you can add it to the Talk page and see if anyone else is interested, too.

Editing Wikipedia is relatively simple. Most edits can be done with the visual editor, which operates like most other social media editing tools. Here is a handy guide to editing Wikipedia with the visual editor. Note that I find it easier to edit Wikipedia on a desktop computer than my mobile phone.

If you want to make changes, there are a few guidelines that you should observe when you are editing Wikipedia.

No original research

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It compiles existing knowledge. It isn’t the place to publish new knowledge. So, each important point should be backed up by solid references. The visual editor is quite good at turning document object identifiers (DOI) and International Standard Business Numbers (ISBN) into full references, which is handy. Most of the time you won’t need to add all the citation details yourself – just use the DOI or ISBN.

Neutral point of view

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a place to beat your own drum. If the information that you are adding is contested, then represent both sides of the argument, as best you can. Don’t be surprised when others change your text to take out superlatives or other emotive language.

Be bold, but not foolhardy

Wikipedia is a living encyclopedia, so your work doesn’t have to be perfect (mine certainly isn’t). ‘Be bold’ was really helpful advice when I started editing Wikipedia. Leave your fears and anxieties behind and have a go. Others will come after you and improve on your work. You would be surprised how many people lovingly tidy up minor mistakes on Wikipedia. This gardening is vital – it helps to make the whole endeavour better.

So, be bold, but don’t be foolhardy. What is the difference? Creating a new section is bold. Deleting a whole section without discussion is foolhardy.

No conflict of interest

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a sales brochure. It is not a place for you to advertise your wares. When you are citing work, don’t cite your own. If you are providing a documented case study, it shouldn’t be about your own university.

If you have published work that is relevant, or want to talk about documented work from your own university, put it on the Talk page. Ask someone else to evaluate it and include it if they think that is relevant. That reduces the risk of conflict of interest.

Good behaviour

Make a profile. There is no requirement to make a profile before you edit Wikipedia, but I think that it is helpful. Editing Wikipedia is fun and can be addictive. Making a profile allows you to see all your contributions in one place. It also makes it a bit easier for people to contact you if they have a question about one of your edits, or want to thank you.

Be polite. Most of the people editing Wikipedia are not academics. They are not used to the culture of helpful criticism that pervades academic discussion. Be gentle with your suggestions (even if others aren’t). Remember that most other editors will come from cultures that are different to yours. Sarcasm and whimsy may not translate.

Use edit summaries. When you edit the page, you will be prompted to add a summary of the change that you have made. This is really helpful for others who come after you. They can check your change and understand, at a glance, that it has been made in good faith. There will also be a check box to mark if your change is a minor edit or not. When I’m editing, I regard anything that changes to meaning of a page (adding or deleting text) as a major edit. If it doesn’t really change the meaning (fixing a typo) then I mark it as a minor edit.

Accept that things will change. Don’t get wedded to your edits. Wikipedia changes. Over time, your carefully constructed text may be edited or even deleted entirely. That’s OK. Don’t get involved in an edit war on Wikipedia. Some people go to war over the stupidest things. If you make a change and someone changes it back, let it go. It isn’t worth your time. Be zen about it.

That’s about it. I find editing Wikipedia to be hugely satisfying. I feel like I’m making the world a tiny bit better. I hope that you enjoy it, too.