N.J.L. Geurts | 22 May 13:07
Picon
Favicon

Wikipedia research

Dear English speaking Wikipedia users,

Sjarlot Stal and Nick Geurts, both Master students at Tilburg University, would like to gather more
insight in the motives of your Wikipedia behaviour. 

This survey will be spread among the various Wikipedia sites of several cultures. The duration of the
survey will be approximately 5-10 minutes. Participation is fully voluntarily and you are free to stop
your participation at any time.

Your information will be processed strictly confidential and will not be passed on to other people.

By clicking on the following link, you will be directed to the survey:
http://www.thesistools.com/web/?id=275775 

If you have any questions you can contact either 
s.stal <at> uvt.nl or n.j.l.geurts <at> uvt.nl. If you wish to receive a copy of the whole research you can leave
your e-mailaddress at the end of the survey.

We would like to thank you in advance!

Kind regards,

Sjarlot Stal
Nick Geurts

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
(Continue reading)

Martijn Hoekstra | 22 May 13:58
Picon

Looks like this might apply to us as well

http://rjbs.manxome.org/rubric/entry/1959

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Horologium | 21 May 21:06
Picon

Re: "How the Professor Who Fooled Wikipedia Got Caught by Reddit", _The Atlantic_

On 5/21/2012 12:33 PM, Carcharoth wrote:
>> one was a link to a find-a-grave page with a photo of the
>> subject (unneeded because we already had a photo of the subject)
> That is arguable. It depends whether it is the same photo at the same
> time of life or not. If the only free photo of someone shows them in
> old age, a link to a site legally hosting a picture of them in their
> youth would be relevant and should be kept in the external links
> section as something that readers would likely want to follow. (It
> also betrays an attitude of: we have one image, we don't need any
> more, as opposed to curating a visual record of the topic).
Actually, the reverse was true: the picture we had was her official 
photograph from her tenure in congress (1960-1975), and the picture from 
find-a-grave, which is not dated, is obviously a picture of a 
substantially older woman. As she lived for another 13 years after 
retiring from congress, it is likely that the picture was taken during 
that period. And yes, the photo we are using is PD (as are all 
Congressional portraits), which is likely why that is the photo used in 
the article.

> This leads me on to one of the big gripes I have about Wikipedia and
> its use of images. Because of the free-content model that Wikipedia is
> based on, the image use in articles tends to be skewed towards public
> domain and freely licensed images. For many subjects, this is not a
> problem, but for some subjects to get a balanced *visual* record of a
> topic, you need to use (or refer in the text to) non-free images as
> well, or if fair use is not possible, to link to a site that legally
> hosts such images.
I don't get involved in the image wars. I tend to look for PD images 
simply because they aren't going to be entangled in those wars, but I 
don't have the absolutist mentality of "only PD images" or "all of the 
(Continue reading)

Steve Bennett | 21 May 05:52
Picon

"Page Ratings" analysis?

Hi all,
  Just wondering if there is any published analysis from the "Page
ratings" widget that appears on every page. My subjective impression
is that the ratings data is pretty bad, but I'd be interested to read
up.

Thanks,
Steve

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Daniel R. Tobias | 20 May 18:55

Re: "How the Professor Who Fooled Wikipedia Got Caught by Reddit", _The Atlantic_

On Sat, 19 May 2012 09:22:23 -0400, Horologium wrote:

> I have seen pages with endless external links, and in those, there
> seems to be an equal number of spam links at the top and the
> bottom of the list. Usually the links in the middle are the best,
> but of course, YMMV. 

That might be an interesting thing to study... the more simpleminded 
spammers (like the more simpleminded among "marketing types" in 
general) would probably be inclined to put their spam links first in 
the list; they're not into any sort of subtlety or cleverness, just 
shoving in everybody's faces the stuff they're trying to promote.  A 
slightly more devious spammer might realize that people will be 
looking for spam links at the top due to mindsets like that, so 
they'll put their links on the bottom so they won't be noticed as 
much by spam-fighters (even if they're also not noticed as much by 
normal readers).  Then, if spam-fighters notice this and start 
defeating it by looking at the bottom too, the next stage would be to 
insert the links in the middle of a long list, where it would be 
least likely to be noticed.  (Though, if the list has some sort of 
internal organization, such as alphabetical or chronological, then a 
misplaced link might still stand out to the sort of geeks who 
obsessive-compulsively maintain such lists.)

--

-- 
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/

(Continue reading)

Horologium | 19 May 15:22
Picon

Re: "How the Professor Who Fooled Wikipedia Got Caught by Reddit", _The Atlantic_

On 5/19/2012 8:00 AM, Andrew Grey wrote:
>> I just went through 19 random pages (9 of them didn't have any ELs, so I
>> didn't count them, and I found three articles in which the last EL was not a
>> useful link. One of them was a spam link to a (non-WMF) wikiproject, one was
> Did you test first links, incidentally? My anecdotal experience has
> been that someone adding a spammy link is more likely to add it to the
> top of the list than someone adding a non-spammy one would be...
>
Actually, I did look at all of the links in each article, and it was 
coincidental that in each case, the only low-utility links were the 
last. None of the 19 random articles I checked had more than four 
external links (only one of those), and it looked like only one was a 
spam-like link, which was added apparently in good-faith by an 
infrequent contributor who also contributes to the other project. I have 
seen pages with endless external links, and in those, there seems to be 
an equal number of spam links at the top and the bottom of the list. 
Usually the links in the middle are the best, but of course, YMMV.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Horologium | 19 May 01:21
Picon

Re: WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 106, Issue 7

On 5/16/2012 11:04 PM, wikien-l-request <at> lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 21:14:12 -0400
> From: Gwern Branwen<gwern0 <at> gmail.com>
> To: English Wikipedia<wikien-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] "How the Professor Who Fooled Wikipedia Got
> 	Caught by Reddit", _The Atlantic_
> Message-ID:
> 	<CAMwO0gyGeZA0j0ksTz3uNjdUH3zBGY3gqHH7KeTynSz82UFVxA <at> mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
>
>
> Incidentally, I have been finishing an experiment involving the
> removal of 100 random external links by an IP; I haven't analyzed it
> yet, so I don't know the outcome, but this gives us an opportunity!
>
> Would anyone in this thread (especially the ones convinced Wikipedia's
> editing community is in fine shape) care to predict what percentage or
> percentage range they expect will have been reverted?
>
> Or what percentage/percentage range they would regard as an acceptable
> failure-to-revert rate?
>
I just went through 19 random pages (9 of them didn't have any ELs, so I 
didn't count them, and I found three articles in which the last EL was 
not a useful link. One of them was a spam link to a (non-WMF) 
wikiproject, one was a link to a find-a-grave page with a photo of the 
(Continue reading)

Gwern Branwen | 16 May 17:49
Picon
Gravatar

"How the Professor Who Fooled Wikipedia Got Caught by Reddit", _The Atlantic_

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/05/how-the-professor-who-fooled-wikipedia-got-caught-by-reddit/257134/
Print: http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/print/2012/05/how-the-professor-who-fooled-wikipedia-got-caught-by-reddit/257134/

> A woman opens an old steamer trunk and discovers tantalizing clues that a long-dead relative may actually
have been a serial killer, stalking the streets of New York in the closing years of the nineteenth century.
A beer enthusiast is presented by his neighbor with the original recipe for Brown's Ale, salvaged decades
before from the wreckage of the old brewery--the very building where the Star-Spangled Banner was sewn in
1813. A student buys a sandwich called the Last American Pirate and unearths the long-forgotten tale of
Edward Owens, who terrorized the Chesapeake Bay in the 1870s.
>
> These stories have two things in common. They are all tailor-made for viral success on the internet. And
they are all lies.
>
> Each tale was carefully fabricated by undergraduates at George Mason University who were enrolled in T.
Mills Kelly's course, Lying About the Past. Their escapades not only went unpunished, they were actually
encouraged by their professor. Four years ago, students created a Wikipedia page detailing the exploits
of Edward Owens, successfully fooling Wikipedia's community of editors. This year, though, one group of
students made the mistake of launching their hoax on Reddit. What they learned in the process provides a
valuable lesson for anyone who turns to the Internet for information.
>
> The first time Kelly taught the course, in 2008, his students confected the life of Edward Owens, mixing
together actual lives and events with brazen fabrications. They created YouTube videos, interviewed
experts, scanned and transcribed primary documents, and built a Wikipedia page to honor Owens' memory.
The romantic tale of a pirate plying his trade in the Chesapeake struck a chord, and quickly landed on USA
Today's pop culture blog. When Kelly announced the hoax at the end of the semester, some were amused,
applauding his pedagogical innovations. Many others were livid.
>
> Critics decried the creation of a fake Wikipedia page as digital vandalism. "Things like that really,
really, really annoy me," fumed founder Jimmy Wales, comparing it to dumping trash in the streets to test
the willingness of a community to keep it clean. But the indignation may, in part, have been compounded by
(Continue reading)

Oliver Keyes | 13 May 04:59
Picon

Re: Office Hours presenting the New Pages Feed

Argh, I'm awful. It's next Wednesday, the 16th :)

On 12 May 2012 21:31, Oliver Keyes <okeyes <at> wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Hey all
>
> Just wanted to let you know that we're going to be doing an Office Hours
> session on the New Pages Feed (formerly New Page Triage/Page Triage).[1]
> This isn't just to discuss progress, so on and so forth - this is because,
> as promised,[2] we've deployed a functional prototype on en.wiki! We're
> taking this opportunity to run people through using it and get any feedback
> we can use to improve the tool.
>
> So, if you're involved in New Page Patrol, or not because you found it too
> opaque and want to see if this is any better for you, we'll be in
> #wikimedia-office from 21:00 UTC.[3] Hope to see you all then :).
>
>
> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:New_Pages_Feed
> [2]
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:New_Pages_Feed/Engagement_strategy
> [3]
> http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?hour=21&min=00&sec=0&day=16&month=05&year=2012
>
>
> --
> Oliver Keyes
> Community Liaison, Product Development
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
(Continue reading)

Oliver Keyes | 13 May 03:31
Picon

Office Hours presenting the New Pages Feed

Hey all

Just wanted to let you know that we're going to be doing an Office Hours
session on the New Pages Feed (formerly New Page Triage/Page Triage).[1]
This isn't just to discuss progress, so on and so forth - this is because,
as promised,[2] we've deployed a functional prototype on en.wiki! We're
taking this opportunity to run people through using it and get any feedback
we can use to improve the tool.

So, if you're involved in New Page Patrol, or not because you found it too
opaque and want to see if this is any better for you, we'll be in
#wikimedia-office from 21:00 UTC.[3] Hope to see you all then :).

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:New_Pages_Feed
[2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:New_Pages_Feed/Engagement_strategy
[3]
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?hour=21&min=00&sec=0&day=16&month=05&year=2012

--

-- 
Oliver Keyes
Community Liaison, Product Development
Wikimedia Foundation
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

(Continue reading)

Kat Walsh | 11 May 23:56
Picon

Re: Creative Commons 4.0 draft--please help answer questions about attribution!

As has been posted here before, CC is working on version 4.0 of their
licenses--in case you haven't seen it, the public draft is up in
several different formats at
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0_Drafts

Right now their focus is on attribution, and they are asking several
specific questions about things to change in the new version.
(A few of the open questions: Is there too much flexibility in
"reasonable manner"? Or not enough? Is there any information people
should be required to provide that they aren't providing? Should you
be able to use a shortcut by just providing a link, and if so, what
should you have to include?)

The questions and space for comment is on the CC wiki here:

http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0/Attribution_and_marking#Questions_about_attribution.2Fmarking_in_4.0

(Ultimately, we hope to be able to use the 4.0 license version as the
default license version for Wikimedia projects--either BY-SA or BY,
depending on which project you are using. Several Wikimedians are
already participating in these discussions, as well as the legal staff
and myself, but your input on things that have and haven't worked well
in 3.0 would really help the process, especially if you have good
examples.)

I will be posting this message around to some of the wikis as well,
but please pass this message around where it is relevant, especially
if you are active on non-English projects!

Cheers,
(Continue reading)


Gmane