Re: [Wiki-research-l] The role of English Wikipedia's top content creators in perpetuating gender bias

On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 9:34 AM, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote: Why do you want categories in the first place? Why not extract whatever semantic meaning you need (e.g., about genderbread) by parsing the sentences in each article? Because for most people gender is a private matter

Re: [Wiki-research-l] The role of English Wikipedia's top content creators in perpetuating gender bias

On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.comwrote: Even disregarding the impact, to assess the bias of the contributors themselves a more precise research, comparative in nature, would be needed. For instance, if one writes articles on parliament members in country

Re: [Wiki-research-l] The role of English Wikipedia's top content creators in perpetuating gender bias

I agree it is difficult in Wikipedia to: * measure bias in number, size, quality of articles * correlate bias in articles to skewed demographics of editors contributing to those articles (probably adjusted by frequency, size, or nature of edits) * determine if editors creating observable

Re: [Wiki-research-l] The role of English Wikipedia's top content creators in perpetuating gender bias

On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 7:55 AM, David Monniaux david.monni...@free.frwrote: I do not find such books on female sports. In fact, if I look for a book on the French women's soccer team on Amazon, I find something... extracted from Wikipedia! (Recall that football is the most popular sport in

Re: [Wiki-research-l] The role of English Wikipedia's top content creators in perpetuating gender bias

Not discounting the excellent points made above, I can't help but feel that there are groups that have been fighting discrimination in institutions for decades and that maybe we need to work with them rather than reinvent a non-straight-white-male-wheel ourselves. People like

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Women on Wikidata

I have huge issues with using wikidata in this fashion. The blp and gender guidelines on wiki.en have evolved over a very long time for some very good rreasons. I invite you to explain for example how culturally appropriate your approach is for non western cultures with more than two genders. Or

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Women on Wikidata

On 20/04/2014 11:05 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: What I do know is that at Wikidata we harvest information from all Wikipedias. It does include en,wp but it is not exclusively so. It does include the Russian, the Chinese, the Arabic ... all Wikipedias. As you know, the

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Women on Wikidata

On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: To be blunt, Wikidata gains the quantitative quality I am looking for when only male and female is added where applicable. Transgender issues with respect are edge cases. Transgender issues are primarily raised

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Women on Wikidata

On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 7:10 AM, Magnus Manske magnusman...@googlemail.com wrote: The success of Wikidata is tightly coupled to the re-use of its wealth of data, both in Wikimedia projects and by third parties. Completeness of data is very much a factor here; for some research purposes,

Re: [Wiki-research-l] this month's research newsletter

I've been avoiding jumping into this thread, to let people closer to the issue have the first say but it seems to me that there are a couple of things that bear saying: * We're a cross-discipline group, academia and Wikipedia * While the portion of the review in question may not have been an

Re: [Wiki-research-l] this month's research newsletter

On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 7:16 PM, Joe Corneli holtzerman...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 4:33 AM, Kim Osman kim.os...@qut.edu.au wrote: The newsletter is an important and unique space that has the potential to foster this interaction through gathering current research and also

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Constructing sensible baselines for Wikipedia language development analytics

Web browser language settings are an obvious place to start this. This will give you an approximation of user's preferred language (more likely the preferred language of those who configured their software). See http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-lang-priorities.en.php for the gory

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Joining derp?

What I think we really need is better standardisation of description of datasets, so that they can shared in machine-readable ways. Then we can have as many different groups working with different sets of datasets as we like and still search, find and publish globally. cheers stuart On Thu, Sep

Re: [Wiki-research-l] What works for increasing editor engagement?

My personal hypothesis is that much wikipedia incivility is part of the broader internet-troll phenomenon (google Don't Read The Comments if you're unfamiliar with the effects of trolling). I'd be very interested to see a linguistic comparison between classes of edits/comments tagged as 'bad'

Re: [Wiki-research-l] What works for increasing editor engagement?

On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:29 PM, Kerry Raymond kerry.raym...@gmail.com wrote: I have email notification for my watch list How many items on your watchlist? I appear to accumulated 14,871 items on mine since I last zero'd it. Right now there are 159 changes in the last 24 hours. I'm not sure I

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Research discussion: Visions for Wikipedia

Sometimes I find the history of gcc ([[GNU Compiler Collection]]) enlightening. gcc was one of the first pieces of open source software to be embedded ubiquitously, globally, in lots of very important things. By 1997 it's development had ossified and those pushing for new features forked the code

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Research discussion: Visions for Wikipedia

On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 9:09 AM, Aaron Halfaker ahalfa...@wikimedia.org wrote: When that kind of roadblock gets put in the path of innovation, we're already ossified. That's an interesting opinion. It seems that you are suggesting that the problem is not recoverable. How do you know that is

Re: [Wiki-research-l] preelminary results from the Wikipedia Gender Inequality Index project - comments welcome

I have a question about the P21. Has any of the GND author sex information leaked into P21? because that's known-bad data. It's bad because the GND in all it's wisdom decided to assign sex to authors based on a apparent gender of the name published under, even for periods when many women were

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Fwd: Traffic to the portal from Zero providers

, which is, as you've noted, flawed without substantial time and energy being applied to map those countries to probable languages. The data the browser already sends to the server contains the /certain/ languages. We can just use that. On 6 May 2015 at 22:50, Stuart A. Yeates syea

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Fwd: Traffic to the portal from Zero providers

with, although we're going to do some more in-depth data collection before any redesign :). On 6 May 2015 at 20:27, Stuart A. Yeates syea...@gmail.com wrote: Reading that excellent presentation, the thought that struck me was: If I wanted to subvert the assumption that Wikipedia == en.wiki, linking

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Fwd: Traffic to the portal from Zero providers

Reading that excellent presentation, the thought that struck me was: If I wanted to subvert the assumption that Wikipedia == en.wiki, linking to http://www.wikipedia.org/ is what I'd do. A smarter http://www.wikipedia.org/ might guess geo-location and thus local languages. cheers stuart --

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Fwd: Traffic to the portal from Zero providers

core to black sky On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 2:24 PM, Mark J. Nelson m...@anadrome.org wrote: Stuart A. Yeates syea...@gmail.com writes: Reading that excellent presentation, the thought that struck me was: If I wanted to subvert the assumption that Wikipedia == en.wiki, linking to http

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Anyone have access to this article?

I have to say that a WMF staffer using their official WMF account to ask community members to commit copyright infringement is not a good look. cheers stuart -- ...let us be heard from red core to black sky On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Jonathan Morgan jmor...@wikimedia.org wrote:

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Anyone have access to this article?

- Authorized Users may also transmit such material to a third-party colleague in hard copy or electronically for personal use or scholarly, educational, or scientific research or professional use. Nicole On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Stuart A. Yeates syea...@gmail.com wrote: I have to say

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Community health (retitled thread)

Here's a list of possible metrics that we could use for measuring community health. That's a great list, with some great metrics. I'd be included to add some silo-breaking metrics which measure activity across projects or across silos within projects: * Number of editors with actions/edits on

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Looking for stats of registered Wikipedians

Due to the pseudonymous nature of Wikipedia, there is no way to collect the number of Wikipedians, only the number of accounts they create and the actions of those accounts. cheers stuart -- ...let us be heard from red core to black sky On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 8:25 AM, Srijan Kumar

Re: [Wiki-research-l] citing female academics

I've done a lot of [[WP:NPP]], and I already have a prejudice about at article before I've read the first word based on the layout of the article (bold name? cats? infobox? reference section? reference section in columns?). I recently did a push to increase the diversity of coverage of local

Re: [Wiki-research-l] citing female academics

On Monday, 29 February 2016, Joe Corneli wrote: > On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 8:24 AM, Jane Darnell > wrote: > > > Oddly, there appears to be no solidarity among female Wikipedians that > take > > this into account, because I assume we have

Re: [Wiki-research-l] citing female academics

, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijs...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hoi, > The blog states that a lot of data was sucked into Wikidata from GND. As > far as I am aware that never happened. So its assertion is wrong. > Thanks, > GerardM > > On 28 February 2016 at 19:43, Stuart A

Re: [Wiki-research-l] citing female academics

-- ...let us be heard from red core to black sky On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 7:14 AM, Gerard Meijssen wrote: > Hoi, > It is trivial when you only consider Wikidata. > I've previous blogged about the issues with sex / gender in wikidata at

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Research on automatically created articles

You interacted with living people through wikipedia and you're recorded information about whether they deleted your references. Many people (like myself) are directly traceable from their wikipedia accounts to their real-life identifies. How is a record of someone doing something not about them?

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Research on automatically created articles

t; of writing, i.e. in Spring). >> >> What I am concerned about is the fact that there will be more such >> experiments from other groups. It would be great to set up a few rules for >> this kind of behavior, so that we can at least point to them. If the only >&

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Research on automatically created articles

I disagree. You continue to treat the problems as information systems issues; they are people / ethnographic issues. This is typified in your complete failure to separate WMF, admins and editors. WMF host this mailing list and the web servers involved and are irrelevant unless we're dealing with

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Research on automatically created articles

* The previous work you cite appears to have created articles in the draft namespace rather than the article namespace. This is a very important and very relevant detail, meaning your situation is in no way comparable to the previous work from my point of view * You appear to be solving a problem

Re: [Wiki-research-l] WMF Open Access Policy and Independent Researchers

There are many open access journals which do not charge fees or any description. See http://www.opendoar.org/ or talk to a friendly librarian to find a journal that meets your needs. cheers stuart -- ...let us be heard from red core to black sky On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Maximilian

Re: [Wiki-research-l] regional KPIs

"closure of the [[Category:Australia]]" is not going to work. In en.wiki subcategories are not subsets in any mathematical sense and the category tree has many, many loops and no roots. cheers stuart -- ...let us be heard from red core to black sky On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Kerry Raymond

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Retention of Wikimedians for the long term

On 22 February 2017 at 16:40, David Goodman wrote: > what mattered to me was personal appreciation of my work--just as it did > in my primary career. Not form notices, but individual public comments > that from people who showed that they understood. There is no way of >

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Retention of Wikimedians for the long term

I have thought about writing a bot that congratulated active users on account creation anniversaries and suggested directions for growth. "Grats X you've been editing for 2 years, here's a picture of a kitten. Have you thought about doing New Page Patrol?" "Grats Y you've been editing for a

[Wiki-research-l] ORCID

Users of this list may be interested in an IdeaLab proposal I've just created: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/drive_contributions_from_the_academic_world_through_better_ORCID_integration cheers stuart -- ...let us be heard from red core to black sky

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Identifying Wikipedia stubs in various languages

en:WP:DYK has a measure of 1,500+ characters of prose, which is a useful cutoff. There is weaponised javascript to measure that at en:WP:Did you know/DYKcheck Probably doesn't translate to CJK languages which have radically different information content per character. cheers stuart -- ...let us

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Identifying Wikipedia stubs in various languages

e way to go. > > > Cheers, > Morten > > > On 20 September 2016 at 02:40, Stuart A. Yeates <syea...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> en:WP:DYK has a measure of 1,500+ characters of prose, which is a useful >> cutoff. There is weaponised javascript to measure that at en

[Wiki-research-l] Tips for doing wikipedia research

In a parallel thread to this, things to avoid when doing wikipedia research are being discussed. That's turning quite negative, so I thought I'd start a contra-thead. This is all my personal experience and advice based on a decade in en.wiki and twice that in academia. Which account to use?

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Thinking big: scaling up Wikimedia's contributor population by two orders of magnitude

I completely disagree with this criticism of the WMF. It seems to me that the main barriers to getting gamification happening in relation to en.wiki are cultural / organisational issues not marketing ones. If the editing communities genuinely wanted huge influxes of complete newbie editors, I

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Research on automatically created articles

For the sake of completeness, the archival URL for the thread at ANI is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive931#Moving_discussion_from_wikimedia_research_mailing_list cheers stuart -- ...let us be heard from red core to black sky On Tue, Aug 16,

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Chapters

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 1:50 PM, Kerry Raymond wrote: > My personal 10c on this having been a chapter member for several years > and a chapter committee member for some of those years is that there are > the chapters who get annual funding and those who don’t. If you

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Editors: research on transitions, learning over time, leaving

I know that I was recruited to Wikipedia from then-competitor everything2, it would be interesting to find active users who joined during E2's precipitous decline, match their accounts and compare editing styles. cheers stuart On Tuesday, March 21, 2017, WereSpielChequers

Re: [Wiki-research-l] tool / framework for article lifecycle stats ?

> > https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools-articleinfo/ > > > > El dc., 15 de març 2017 a les 9:21, Stuart A. Yeates (<syea...@gmail.com > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','syea...@gmail.com');>>) va escriure: > >> Is there a tool or framework forgetting article lifecycle stats in an

[Wiki-research-l] tool / framework for article lifecycle stats ?

Is there a tool or framework forgetting article lifecycle stats in an automated fashion. Is anyone aware of something like that? Things like creator (+ their basic stats), total # of edits, who's edited the article (+ their basic stats), article age, article flags, etc. I'm reasonably platform /

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Quick way to figure out how many Wikipedia edits a given editor has made?

Be aware that the https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth method is unreliable / misleading for many editors whose accounts predate Central Authentication. cheers stuart -- ...let us be heard from red core to black sky On 9 March 2017 at 09:47, Jonathan Cardy

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Student Learning with Wikipedia

Do you have a link to the original spec for the 'Fall 2016 study' so we can judge whether you've done what you've said you'd do so far? cheers stuart -- ...let us be heard from red core to black sky On 6 April 2017 at 09:59, Zach McDowell wrote: > Hi everyone, > I've been

Re: [Wiki-research-l] category extraction question

The category system on en.wiki is not an IS-A system and there have been several discussions about making it it based on mathematical principals which have come to nothing because the consensus of editors is against it. The best way to think about categories is as a locally-faceted related links

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Recognizing domain experts contribution to Wikipedia

It is worth remembering that via the orcid identifier in the authority control template, the is now a standard linked-data mechanism for researchers to identify themselves. I have no idea whether anyone is looking at that though. Cheers Stuart On Saturday, July 8, 2017, Pine W

Re: [Wiki-research-l] category extraction question

to black sky On 12 July 2017 at 02:53, Leila Zia <le...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > Hi Stuart, > > On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 6:45 PM, Stuart A. Yeates <syea...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > The category system on en.wiki is not an IS-A system and there have been > > several

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Project exploring automated classification of article importance

On em.wiki article importance is relative to some wikiproject. This is encoded in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:WPBannerMeta which appears on 16% of all wikipedia pages via specialisations such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:WikiProject_New_Zealand Within Wikiproject New

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Project exploring automated classification of article importance

t; Kerry > > -Original Message- > From: Wiki-research-l [mailto:wiki-research-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] > On Behalf Of Stuart A. Yeates > Sent: Friday, 28 April 2017 6:18 AM > To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities < > wiki-research-l@list

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Wiki Studies issue 1

OJS, the software in use, includes support for all three of these, but only the last is usually free. cheers stuart -- ...let us be heard from red core to black sky On 2 October 2017 at 23:59, Andy Mabbett <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote: > On 2 October 2017 at 10:34, Stuart A. Yea

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Invitations to participate in a research about Wikidata as a learning platform

.org/wiki/Wiki_Project_Med>. > Chairperson, Wikipedia & Education User Group > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_%26_Education_User_Group>. > Chairperson, The Hebrew Literature Digitization Society > <http://www.israelgives.org/amuta/580428621>. > Chief Editor, Project

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Invitations to participate in a research about Wikidata as a learning platform

I find the personal information requested particularly intrusive compared to other similar surveys (and the overview suggests that further pages are going to ask for more personal information), especially since the cover page does not mention any ethics board approval (not sure if this is required

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Empowering Researchers

Multiple competing definitions of terms. Seems a little similar to everything2, whose editorship Wikipedia canabalised more than a decade ago... For those at their first rodeo, feel free to Google it. Cheers Stuart On Sat, 8 Dec 2018 12:11 am Gabriele - Qeios Dear list members, > I’m Gabriele

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Sampling new editors in English Wikipedia

In addition to Kerry's excellent examples there are users editing wikipedia though TOR, the anonymity and censorship circumvention network. These users face extra scrutiny. cheers stuart -- ...let us be heard from red core to black sky On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 at 13:04, Kerry Raymond wrote: > >

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Sampling new editors in English Wikipedia

ho I suspect are > more likely to have multiple accounts for licit reasons). > > On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 4:34 PM Stuart A. Yeates wrote: > > > Note that this code deals with accounts, not editors, which is what > > Haifeng asked for. > > > > There are many reasons, bot

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Sampling new editors in English Wikipedia

meant extracting a random sample of new editors (month by month) from > > > Wikipedia edit history. > > > > > > It is not about survey of new editors, but still thanks for your > > > suggestions. > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Haifeng Z

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Sampling new editors in English Wikipedia

There are a number of new-editor-heavy noticeboards. I would suggest posting an invite there to your survey (or whatever) If you ask for editor's usernames you can filter out those who don't meet your definition of 'new' I'm thinking of places like:

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Sampling new editors in English Wikipedia

On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 09:16, Haifeng Zhang wrote: > > Thanks a lot for help, Finn. Now my query can draw sample of new registered > editors. To repeat a point I made earlier in the thread: this query deals with accounts not editors. Many at the coalface consider this to be a very important

Re: [Wiki-research-l] User type context sensitivity to introduction sections.

I believe that the English language term you are looking for is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plain_English and the problem is that en.wiki policies already require plain english. The core of the issue is that writing in plain english is hard and currently there are few tools to support editors

Re: [Wiki-research-l] User type context sensitivity to introduction sections.

On the English language wikipedia the guidelines about ledes are pretty clear and such articles are in breach of them. Please tag them with {{lead rewrite}} when you find them. TW lets you do this via javascript magic. cheers stuart -- ...let us be heard from red core to black sky On Sat, 9

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Transferring CC-BY scientific literature into WP

exandre.hocq...@univ-lorraine.fr> wrote: > > > On 17/04/2019 22:36, Stuart A. Yeates wrote: > > > On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 08:29, Alexandre Hocquet wrote: > > >> what? then a lot of wikipedia > > >> articles should be labelled as {{secondary sources needed}})

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Transferring CC-BY scientific literature into WP

On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 08:29, Alexandre Hocquet wrote: > what? then a lot of wikipedia > articles should be labelled as {{secondary sources needed}}) Exactly. Sourcing as a whole across wikipedia already relies too heavily on primary sources. I regularly tag articles as such. cheers stuart --

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Questions about SuggestBot

a:Task_Center). > > Are the links/lists (under "Do it!") used frequently by editors as routing > tools? > > > Thanks, > > Haifeng Zhang > ____ > From: Wiki-research-l on behalf > of Stuart A. Yeates > Sent: Sunday, June

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Questions about SuggestBot

(a) SuggestBot visited me in the last week. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AStuartyeates=revision=902456290=901462765 (b) There are lots of different task routing approaches: lists of redlinks,administrative groups, etc. (c) Sentences containing the words 'bot' and

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Ways thru which articles could attract editors

There are, broadly, two kinds of ways to attract editors, ways that attract existing wikipedia editors to specific articles (such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SuggestBot , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Article_Rescue_Squadron and

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Analysis into active user stats

> I "have attached a .pdf of the results to this email." This appears not to have come through. cheers stuart -- ...let us be heard from red core to black sky On Wed, 1 May 2019 at 08:50, RhinosF1 Wikipedia wrote: > > Hi all, > As you maybe aware, Over the last 3 weeks, I've been looking into

Re: [Wiki-research-l] New paper - Indigenous knowledge on Wikipedia

At the end of the day, wikipedia is by definition a tertiary source source and built on concepts of Western print culture. Traditional knowledge is immiscible with this model. This is exactly why I stopped promoting mi.wiki locally here --- as I understand the needs of mi speakers and activists

Re: [Wiki-research-l] New paper - Indigenous knowledge on Wikipedia

Hi Samuel Can you provide examples of tertiary sources from pure oral cultures? I've never heard of any. Cheers Stuart On Sat, 6 Jul 2019 1:19 am Samuel Klein wrote: > I think we have all the mechanics needed for this. > > - Individual revisions aren't editable, once posted, and stay around >

Re: [Wiki-research-l] New paper - Indigenous knowledge on Wikipedia

out of my depth > but enjoying the back and forth here. > > On Fri, Jul 5, 2019 at 5:20 PM, Stuart A. Yeates > wrote: > > > Hi Samuel > > > > Can you provide examples of tertiary sources from pure oral cultures? > I've > > never heard of any. > > > >

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Does wikipedians feel like commoners ?

It's worth noting that while Richard Stallman and Eric S. Raymond played important roles historically and published widely-read-at-the-time analyses, both have had significant falls from grace since then and basing current analyses of the commons and other systems on their work should be done

[Wiki-research-l] Series of blog posts

Over the last couple of days I've posted a series of professionally-editted blog posts related to my involvement in en.wiki: https://sciblogs.co.nz/guestwork/2019/12/18/how-i-came-to-be-writing-wikipedia-biographies-for-female-new-zealand-professors/

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Modelling user behaviour on Wikipedia

Kiril > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 8:36 PM Stuart A. Yeates wrote: > > > When you say "participant", "user" and "editor" do you actually mean > > account? > > > > I routinely notice what appear to be people attending real-file events &

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Modelling user behaviour on Wikipedia

When you say "participant", "user" and "editor" do you actually mean account? I routinely notice what appear to be people attending real-file events using one account but then editing afterwards with a different account. cheers stuart -- ...let us be heard from red core to black sky On Tue, 25

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Modelling user behaviour on Wikipedia

Hi Kiril Let's just say that history has taught us to be risk-averse to drive-by researchers. Can you point us to other research output using this methodology? Do you (or any of your team) have significant editing experience? Are you familiar with the firestorm that is paid editing and sock

Re: [Wiki-research-l] How many papers / books about wikis?

This largely depends on what you mean by "about" Many tens of thousands of articles use a wikipedia or other WMF service as a source in some way (either a source for a definition, a selection or as a traditional datasource in some way) or speculate about the future of wikis. At the other end of

Re: [Wiki-research-l] NEEDS COMMENT ASAP: Wikimedia Project Grant Proposal to address BIAS!

If there's a deadline coming up for supporting research proposals, how about doing the right thing and post a link to all the research proposals? cheers stuart -- ...let us be heard from red core to black sky On Fri, 13 Mar 2020 at 02:26, Jackie wrote: > > Hi Friends, > > I submitted a

Re: [Wiki-research-l] NEEDS COMMENT ASAP: Wikimedia Project Grant Proposal to address BIAS!

ding soon, but we will still be reviewing > feedback through the committee review period starting on 17 March 2020. > > With thanks, > > Chris > > > *Chris Schilling* (him/his/they/their) > User:I JethroBT (WMF) > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:I_JethroB

Re: [Wiki-research-l] [Announcement] Daily Social Media Traffic Report for English Wikipedia articles

My immediate thought is how to connect this to the wiki projects for each article, because wiki projects are the primary sources of expert knowledge and have the resources to deal with many issues. Cheers Stuart On Tue, 24 Mar 2020, 8:24 AM Jonathan Morgan, wrote: > The WMF Research team has

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Editor surveys on race/ethnicity/religion

iders" is not particularly > > welcoming) but this is also probably the style of approach (asking people > > how well they feel represented within Wikipedia content or editor > > community) that you'd have to take to get information on ethnicity / race / >

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Editor surveys on race/ethnicity/religion

context (although it > does not sound implausible). > > Best, > > Lodewijk > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 11:39 AM Stuart A. Yeates wrote: > > > Another point not touched on by other commenters is that even if ideal > > race / ethnicity question(s were developed for eve

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Editor surveys on race/ethnicity/religion

The ethnicity / race question is an incredibly hard question to compose in an internationalised way. Pretty much every country in the world uses different terms and there are some very confusing cases where the same term is used in different countries to mean very different things (e,g, "Asian"

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Requesting access to deleted pages for research purposes

I recently completed a project writing en.wiki articles for all female and indigenous professors in my country, .nz. I now write pronounless biographies, because there were a significant number whose gender wasn't apparent from their public persona. My guess is that women and LGBTIA+ minorities

Re: [Wiki-research-l] How to quantifying "effort" or "time spent" put into articles?

I suggest that you talk to editors who have got an article to featured-article status about their estimates of the work involved (commonly cited as 3-6 months full time work). If you then count their edits on the article and divide one by the other... cheers stuart -- ...let us be heard from

[Wiki-research-l] Re: Edit Summary Stats / Research?

There is a long-standing tool to search them at https://sigma.toolforge.org/summary.py?name=Stuartyeates=re-review=500=enwiki=Wikipedia In case you're looking for code to reuse. cheers stuart -- ...let us be heard from red core to black sky On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 at 05:38, WereSpielChequers

[Wiki-research-l] Re: Generation gap widens between admins and other editors on the English Wikipedia.

> Given that the total size of the community is stable or slowly growing, I > don't see why so few candidates are coming forward for RFA. I've written thousands of en.wiki biographies and noticed that the hardest people to find sources for are lawyers (and by extension judges) because these

[Wiki-research-l] Re: Can I have a Wikipedia article written about me?

If you want a Wikipedia article about you, you'll need independent secondary sources with in depth coverage of you and at least a couple of editors who can read the language(s) they're in. If you're looking at the English language Wikipedia, I suggest starting at the teahouse. Other Wikipedia have