Browse wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
Creating, destroying, and restoring value in Wikipedia
Abstract Wikipedia's brilliance and curse is that aWikipedia's brilliance and curse is that any user can edit any of the encyclopedia entries. We introduce the notion of the impact of an edit, measured by the number of times the edited version is viewed. Using several datasets, including recent logs of all article views, we show that an overwhelming majority of the viewed words were written by frequent editors and that this majority is increasing. Similarly, using the same impact measure, we show that the probability of a typical article view being damaged is small but increasing, and we present empirically grounded classes of damage. Finally, we make policy recommendations for Wikipedia and other wikis in light of these findings.nd other wikis in light of these findings.
Added by wikilit team Yes  +
Collected data time dimension Longitudinal  +
Comments "We show that 1/10th of 1% of editors cont"We show that 1/10th of 1% of editors contributed nearly half of the value, measured by words read... [and] 42% of damage is repaired almost immediately, i.e., before it can confuse, offend, or mislead anyone." "[B]ecause a very small proportion of Wikipedia editors account for most of its value, it is important to keep them happy, for example by ensuring that they gain appropriate visibility and status. However, turnover is inevitable in any online community. Wikipedia should also develop policies, tools, and user interfaces to bring in newcomers, teach them community norms, and help them become effective editors." p.267-268 Wikipedia pages; request logs." p.267-268 Wikipedia pages; request logs
Conclusion Our view-based metrics let us both sharpenOur view-based metrics let us both sharpen previous results and go beyond them. Others have shown that 1% of Wikipedia editors contributed about half of edits [6]. We show that 1/10th of 1% of editors contributed nearly half of the value, measured by words read. Others have shown that one type of damage was repaired quickly [20]. We show this for all types of damage. We also show what this result means for readers: 42% of damage is repaired almost immediately, i.e., before it can confuse, offend, or mislead anyone. Nonetheless, there are still hundreds of millions of damaged views. We categorize the types of damage that occured, show how often they occured, describe their potential impact on readers, and discuss how hard (or easy) they are to detect automatically. We give examples of especially impactful damage to illustrate these points. Finally, we show that the probability of encountering damage increased exponentially from January 2003 to June 2006. What are the implications of our results? First, because a very small proportion of Wikipedia editors account for most of its value, it is important to keep them happy, for example by ensuring that they gain appropriate visibility and status. However, turnover is inevitable in any online community. Wikipedia should also develop policies, tools, and user interfaces to bring in newcomers, teach them community norms, and help them become effective editors. Second, we speculate that the exponential increase in the probability of encountering damage was stopped by the widespread use of anti-vandalism bots. It is likely that vandals will continue working to defeat the bots, leading to an arms race. Thus, continued work on automatic detection of damage is important. Our results suggest types of damage to focus on; the good news is that the results show little subtlety among most vandals. We also generally believe in augmentation, not automation. That is, we prefer intelligent task routing [7] approaches, where automation directs humans to potential damage incidents, but humans make the final decision.dents, but humans make the final decision.
Conference location Sanibel Island, FL, United states +
Data source Computer usage logs  + , Wikipedia pages  +
Dates 4-7 +
Doi 10.1145/1316624.1316663 +
Google scholar url http://scholar.google.com/scholar?ie=UTF-8&q=%22Creating%2C%2Bdestroying%2C%2Band%2Brestoring%2Bvalue%2Bin%2BWikipedia%22  +
Has author Reid Priedhorsky + , Jilin Chen + , Shyong Tony K. Lam + , Katherine Panciera + , Loren Terveen + , John Riedl +
Has domain Information systems +
Has topic Other content topics + , Vandalism + , Participation trends + , Collaboration software +
Month November  +
Pages 259-268  +
Peer reviewed Yes  +
Publication type Conference paper  +
Published in GROUP '07 Proceedings of the 2007 international ACM conference on Supporting group work +
Publisher Association for Computing Machinery +
Research design Statistical analysis  +
Research questions We pose three specific research questions:We pose three specific research questions: 1. Creating value: Who contributes Wikipedia’s value? Is it the handful of people who edit thousands of times, or is it the thousands of people who edit a handful of times? 2. Impact of damage: What is the impact of damage such as nonsensical, offensive, or false content? How quickly is it repaired, and how much of it persists long enough to confuse, offend, or mislead readers? 3. Types of damage: What types of damage occur, and how often?What types of damage occur, and how often?
Revid 10,717  +
Theories Undetermined
Theory type Analysis  +
Title Creating, destroying, and restoring value in Wikipedia
Unit of analysis Article view  + , Edit  +
Url http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1316663  +
Wikipedia coverage Main topic  +
Wikipedia data extraction Dump  +
Wikipedia language English  +
Wikipedia page type Article  +
Year 2007  +
Creation dateThis property is a special property in this wiki. 15 March 2012 20:25:38  +
Categories Other content topics  + , Vandalism  + , Participation trends  + , Collaboration software  + , Information systems  + , Publications  +
Modification dateThis property is a special property in this wiki. 30 January 2014 20:22:47  +
hide properties that link here 
  No properties link to this page.
 

 

Enter the name of the page to start browsing from.