Measuring wiki viability (ii)

Computing Research Repository, 2007

Since its inception six years ago, the online encyclopedia Wikipedia has accumu- lated 6.40 million articles and 250 million edits, contributed in a predominantly undirected and haphazard fashion by 5.77 million unvetted volunteers. Despite the apparent lack of order, the 50 million edits by 4.8 million contributors to the 1.5 million articles in the English-language Wikipedia follow strong certain overall

2007

Abstract Wikis are collaborative platforms enabling collective elaboration of knowledge, the most famous and possibly the most successful thereof being the Wikipedia. There are currently plenty of other active open-access wikis, with varying success: some recruit many users and achieve sustainability, while others strive to attract sufficient active contributors, irrespective of the topic of the wiki.

Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Wikis, 2008

We consider the problem of measuring user contributions to versioned, collaborative bodies of information, such as wikis. Measuring the contributions of individual authors can be used to divide revenue, to recognize merit, to award status promotions, and to choose the order of authors when citing the content. In the context of the Wikipedia, previous works on author contribution estimation have focused on two criteria: the total text created, and the total number of edits performed. We show that neither of these criteria work well: both techniques are vulnerable to manipulation, and the totaltext criterion fails to reward people who polish or rearrange the content. We consider and compare various alternative criteria that take into account the quality of a contribution, in addition to the quantity, and we analyze how the criteria differ in the way they rank authors according to their contributions. As an outcome of this study, we propose to adopt total edit longevity as a measure of author contribution. Edit longevity is resistant to simple attacks, since edits are counted towards an author's contribution only if other authors accept the contribution. Edit longevity equally rewards people who create content, and people who rearrange or polish the content. Finally, edit longevity distinguishes the people who contribute little (who have contribution close to zero) from spammers or vandals, whose contribution quickly grows negative.

The study of collaboration patterns in wikis can help shed light on the process of content creation by online communities. To turn a wiki's revision history into a collaboration network, we propose an algorithm that identifies as authors of a page the users who provided the most of its relevant content, measured in terms of quantity and of acceptance by the community. The scalability of this approach allows us to study the English Wikipedia community as a co-authorship network. We find evidence of the presence of a nucleus of very active contributors, who seem to spread over the whole wiki, and to interact preferentially with inexperienced users. The fundamental role played by this elite is witnessed by the growing centrality of sociometric stars in the network. Isolating the community active around a category, it is possible to study its specific dynamics and most influential authors.

2021

Wikipedia, a paradigmatic example of online knowledge space is organized in a collaborative, bottom-up way with voluntary contributions, yet it maintains a level of reliability comparable to that of traditional encyclopedias. The lack of selected professional writers and editors makes the judgement about quality and trustworthiness of the articles a real challenge. Here we show that a self-consistent metrics for the network defined by the edit records captures well the character of editors' activity and the articles' level of complexity. Using our metrics, one can better identify the human-labeled high-quality articles, e.g., "featured" ones, and differentiate them from the popular and controversial articles. Furthermore, the dynamics of the editor-article system is also well captured by the metrics, revealing the evolutionary pathways of articles and diverse roles of editors. We demonstrate that the collective effort of the editors indeed drives to the direction o...

Sustainability

Wikipedia is an undeniably successful project, with unprecedented numbers of online volunteer contributors. After 2007, researchers started to observe that the number of active editors for the largest Wikipedias declined after rapid initial growth. Years after those announcements, researchers and community activists still need to understand how to measure community health. In this paper, we study patterns of growth, decline and stagnation, and we propose the creation of 6 sets of language-independent indicators that we call “Vital Signs”. Three focus on the general population of active editors creating content: retention, stability, and balance; the other three are related to specific community functions: specialists, administrators, and global community participation. We borrow the analogy from the medical field, as these indicators represent a first step in defining the health status of a community; they can constitute a valuable reference point to foresee and prevent future risks...

Proceedings of the 2007 international symposium on Wikis - WikiSym '07, 2007

The rise of the Internet has enabled collaboration and cooperation on an unprecedentedly large scale. The online encyclopedia Wikipedia, which presently comprises 7.2 million articles created by 7.04 million distinct editors, provides a consummate example. We examined all 50 million edits made to the 1.5 million English-language Wikipedia articles and found that the high-quality articles are distinguished by a marked increase in number of edits, number of editors, and intensity of cooperative behavior, as compared to other articles of similar visibility and age. This is significant because in other domains, fruitful cooperation has proven to be difficult to sustain as the size of the collaboration increases. Furthermore, in spite of the vagaries of human behavior, we show that Wikipedia articles accrete edits according to a simple stochastic mechanism in which edits beget edits. Topics of high interest or relevance are thus naturally brought to the forefront of quality.

Knowledge Based Systems, 2013

Wiki systems, such as Wikipedia, provide a multitude of opportunities for large-scale online knowledge collaboration. Despite Wikipedia's successes with the open editing model, dissenting voices give rise to unreliable content due to conflicts amongst contributors. Frequently modified controversial articles by dissent editors hardly present reliable knowledge. Some overheated controversial articles may be locked by Wikipedia administrators who might leave their own bias in the topic. It could undermine both the neutrality and freedom policies of Wikipedia. As Richard Rorty suggested ''Take Care of Freedom and Truth Will Take Care of Itself''[1], we present a new open Wiki model in this paper, called TrustWiki, which bridge readers closer to the reliable information while allowing editors to freely contribute. From our perspective, the conflict issue results from presenting the same knowledge to all readers, without regard for the difference of readers and the revealing of the underlying social context, which both causes the bias of contributors and affects the knowledge perception of readers. TrustWiki differentiates two types of readers, ''value adherents'' who prefer compatible viewpoints and ''truth diggers'' who crave for the truth. It provides two different knowledge representation models to cater for both types of readers. Social context, including social background and relationship information, is embedded in both knowledge representations to present readers with personalized and credible knowledge. To our knowledge, this is the first paper on knowledge representation combining both psychological acceptance and truth reveal to meet the needs of different readers. Although this new Wiki model focuses on reducing conflicts and reinforcing the neutrality policy of Wikipedia, it also casts light on the other content reliability problems in Wiki systems, such as vandalism and minority opinion suppression.

International Conference on Software and Data Technologies, 2007

In a few years, Wikipedia has become one of the information systems with more public (both producers and consumers) of the Internet. Its system and information architecture is re latively simple, but has proven to be capable of supporting the largest and more diverse community of collaborative authorship worldwide. In this paper, we analyze in detail this community, and the

Journal of Web Semantics, 2021

Wikidata has been increasingly adopted by many communities for a wide variety of applications, which demand high-quality knowledge to deliver successful results. In this paper, we develop a framework to detect and analyze low-quality statements in Wikidata by shedding light on the current practices exercised by the community. We explore three indicators of data quality in Wikidata, based on: 1) community consensus on the currently recorded knowledge, assuming that statements that have been removed and not added back are implicitly agreed to be of low quality; 2) statements that have been deprecated; and 3) constraint violations in the data. We combine these indicators to detect lowquality statements, revealing challenges with duplicate entities, missing triples, violated type rules, and taxonomic distinctions. Our findings complement ongoing efforts by the Wikidata community to improve data quality, aiming to make it easier for users and editors to find and correct mistakes.