It sounds interesting, Laura.  There are a couple of parameters that may
create issues, specifically the gender and geolocation of editors of the
articles (most editors do not gender-identify or specify their geographic
location), but it's a pretty thorough review of the interrelationships
between the various WMF projects and with external media.

Risker/Anne

On 17 June 2012 21:58, Laura Hale <[email protected]> wrote:

> I think I brought this up in another post about developing a methodology
> to determine this based on a number of offline conversations I was having.
> As this might be of interest to people doing research on women's
> involvement for Wikipedia, I'm crossposting this here from my blog.  The
> entry can be found at
> http://ozziesport.com/2012/06/measuring-the-influence-of-wikipedia-on-public-thinking-in-australian-womens-sport-a-proposed-methodology/.
>   It isn't necessarily the one I will ultimately use when I set out to do
> this, but working to set up some of the tools to allow measuring for this
> in the near future.  If anyone has any thoughts on how to better measure
> the influence of Wikipedia for public thought formation, especially as it
> pertains to women's issues, that would be much appreciated.
>
>
>
>
> *
> *
> *Measuring the influence of Wikipedia on public thinking (in Australian
> women’s sport): A proposed methodology*
> This entry was posted by Laura on Monday, 18 June, 2012
>
> I spend a lot of time thinking about Wikipedia and talking to people in
> Australia’s sport sector about Wikipedia, Wikinews and Commons.  Some of
> those I have talked to tend to agree that Wikipedia has value, potentially
> more value than a news story from a traditional outlet where the story
> quickly disappear.  There is still a question of: “Why does Wikipedia
> matter?”  The most obvious answer is “Page views demonstrate meaning.
> People are going to Wikipedia for information about sport, Australian
> sport, and women’s sport.  The page views clearly demonstrate that
> Wikipedia matters and is worth contributing to as an organisation.”  This
> argument doesn’t always work and I’ve been challenged to demonstrate
> Wikipedia’s influence on the topic of Australian women’s sport.
>
> This is in some ways a frustrating endeavor.  How do you measure
> Wikipedia’s influence beyond page views?  As a person who loves research
> design, I have a number of ideas but how to implement and analyze
> information is still something I am struggling with because I keep coming
> back to the need to possibly use a qualitative approach reliant on survey
> research… and that always makes me nervous.  Still, with this in mind, the
> following methodology is one I have been leaning towards trying to write up
> more formally.
>
>
> *
> Benchmark English Wikipedia, English Wikinews and Commons coverage of
> Australian women’s sport:*
>
>     Develop a list of all existing articles pertaining to Australian
> women’s sport on English Wikipedia.  The list would include biographies,
> sport teams, leagues, organisations and people connected to administering
> women’s sport, competitions, articles about women’s sport in the country,
> articles about sport in the country, general sport articles that broadly
> intersect with Australian women’s sport such as women’s basketball and the
> Olympic games.  Once the list is created, benchmark the following for each
> article:
>         Determine the existing size of the article.
>         Identify projects the article is part of.
>         Identify current article assessment.
>         Date article was created and who created it.
>         Determine the number of contributors to the article.
>         Determine the gender ratio for article contributors.
>         Determine the geographic location of article contributors.
>         Determine the historic page views for the article.
>         Determine if the article has appeared at Did you Know, and average
> traffic before and after it appeared.
>         Determine if there is a spoken word version of the article.
>         Count the number of pictures on each article.
>     Develop a list of all existing news stories about Australian women’s
> sport on English Wikinews.
>         Determine the historical traffic to these articles.
>         Identify the categories these articles are included in.
>         Identify if the article is synthesis or original research.
>         Identify all Wikipedia articles the story  is linked on.
>     Develop a list of all photographs pertaining to Australian women’s
> sport on Commons.
>         Develop a list what articles these images are used on across
> Wikimedia Foundation projects.
>         Develop a list of contributors for images in this space.
>
> This data will provide a framework for understanding the story of
> Australian women’s sport coverage on Wikipedia, and will enable case
> studies to be developed around any potential editing efforts affiliated
> with a study.  This data is largely background, which can help to
> contextualise data around Wikipedia as it pertains to influence thought
> formation.
>
>
>
> *Benchmark interest in English Wikipedia, English Wikinews and Commons
> coverage of Australian women’s sport:*
>
> The next step is possibly the more difficult one: How do we contextualise
> Wikipedia articles to understand where they sit as resources people turn to
> for information?  Below are quantitative, web based measures to try to
> determine this:
>
>     The News
>         Find the number of articles in the media that link to/mention an
> article on Wikipedia about a topic.
>         Check articles about a topic to find examples of media plagiarism
> of Wikipedia articles.
>     Academia
>         Identify the number of times an academic text uses Wikipedia as a
> source.
>         Identify which academics reference Wikipedia.
>     Sport Institutions
>         Count the number of links to Wikimedia content on their website.
>         Count the number of links to Wikimedia content on their social
> media related portals.
>     The Community
>         Facebook
>             Measure the number of likes for a Wikipedia article on
> Facebook.
>         Twitter
>             Measure the number of links to an article.
>             Identify who is tweeting about the article, get their
> individual Twitter metric data.
>             Get the metric data for all the followers of a person tweeting
> about a topic.
>         Google+
>             Measure the number of links to an article.
>             Identify who is tweeting about the article, get their
> individual Google+ information.
>         LiveJournal and clones
>             Measure the number of mentions for an article on LiveJournal
> and its clones.
>             Get the community or user metrics for including the links.
>         Google search
>             Determine the ranking of the Wikipedia and Wikinews articles
> on Google.
>             Using Google Trends, determine the relative number of searches
> for these topics and where they are origination from, both with and without
> Wikipedia in the search phrase.
>         Yahoo!Answers
>             Measure the number of questions about the topic. (Closed, and
> open.)
>             Measure the number of questions on Wikipedia about articles.
>             Measure the number of answers that reference the article.
>
> While these can help measure a certain level of influence, they do not
> necessarily explain why people are citing or how this forms thinking.
> Results would just suggest current levels of awareness but not necessarily
> influence.  The two are really separate points.
>
> *Survey attitudes towards English Wikipedia, English Wikinews and Commons
> coverage of Australian women’s sport:*
>
> A third methodology is needed to complement the previous two.  As much as
> it pains me, a qualitative methodology needs to be used: Survey work needs
> to be completed.  The following groups need to be surveyed with questions
> seeking specific information in certain areas.  The following are some
> broad themes for this group.
>
>     The media
>         As a journalist, what is their opinion of Wikipedia in this area?
>         Have they used Wikipedia, Wikinews or other projects as a resource
> when working on a story?
>     Academics and students
>         As an academic or student, what is their opinion of Wikipedia in
> this area?
>         Have they used Wikipedia, Wikinews or other projects as a resource
> when working on papers?
>     Sport industry participants including athletes
>         As members of the sport industry, what is their opinion of
> Wikipedia in this area?
>         Have they actively sought to improve content related to themselves
> or their sport organisation on WMF projects?
>     Sport fans and participants
>         Do they use Wikipedia for information and how reliable do they
> consider it to be?
>         Do they contribute to Wikipedia?
>
> This information would then need to be wrapped around existing research
> that discusses the influence of the media, in this case in an Australian
> and sport  context, academia and industry influence on forming public
> perception.  An approach also needs to be developed which can include a
> before and after treatment for a content improvement drive in this area.
> In doing the first part, it should hopefully become apparent where there is
> a need for articles to be improved or created to develop a class of
> articles for improvement.
>
>
> Sincerely,
> Laura Hale
> --
> twitter: purplepopple
> blog: ozziesport.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gendergap mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
>
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap

Reply via email to