Issues of cross-contextual information quality evaluation—The case of Arabic, English, and Korean Wikipedias

Stvilia, Besiki; Al-Faraj, Abdullah; Yi, Yong Jeong

doi:10.1016/j.lisr.2009.07.005

Cited by 40 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, authors of "Cultural Differences in Collaborative Authoring of Wikipedia" compared French, German, Japanese and Dutch Wikipedia [22] while "Cross-cultural analysis of the Wikipedia community" analyzed English, Hebrew, Japanese, and Malay [10]. Arabic, English, and Korean Wikipedias were compared by Stvilia et al [25]. These analysis were performed with manual content analysis of some article pages from the different Wikipedias.…”

Section: Language Wikipedia Communities and Their Points Of Viewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Manypedia: Comparing language points of view of Wikipedia communities

Massa

Scrinzi

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 4 million articles of the English Wikipedia have been written in a collaborative fashion by more than 16 million volunteer editors. On each article, the community of editors strive to reach a neutral point of view, representing all significant views fairly, proportionately, and without biases. However, beside the English one, there are more than 280 editions of Wikipedia in different languages and their relatively isolated communities of editors are not forced by the platform to discuss and negotiate their points of view. So the empirical question is: do communities on different language Wikipedias develop their own diverse Linguistic Points of View (LPOV)? To answer this question we created and released as open source Manypedia, a web tool whose aim is to facilitate cross-cultural analysis of Wikipedia language communities by providing an easy way to compare automatically translated versions of their different representations of the same topic.

show abstract

Section: Language Wikipedia Communities and Their Points Of Viewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Manypedia: Comparing language points of view of Wikipedia communities

Massa

Scrinzi

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition to these, other articles that studied featured articles are discussed elsewhere in this review (Viégas, Wattenberg & McKeon 2007;Stvilia et al 2009;Goldspink 2009;Goldspink 2010 …”

Section: Featured Articlesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They oun significant correlation, indicating the influence o people's cul u l ckg oun on he con u on behavior on Wikipedia, and the Internet in general. Stvilia et al (2009) found that "different Wikipedia communities may have different understandings of and models for quality" (2009, p.232). They also demonstrated "the feasibility of using some article edit-based metrics for automated quality measurement across different Wikipedia contexts" (2009, p.232).…”

Section: Cultural and Linguistic Effects On Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The People’s Encyclopedia Under the Gaze of the Sages: A Systematic Review of Scholarly Research on Wikipedia

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wikipedia has become one of the ten most visited sites on the Web, and the world's leading source of Web reference information. Its rapid success has inspired hundreds of scholars from various disciplines to study its content, communication and community dynamics from various perspectives. This article presents a systematic review of scholarly research on Wikipedia. We describe our detailed, rigorous methodology for identifying over 450 scholarly studies of Wikipedia. We present the WikiLit website (http://wikilit.referata.com), where most of the papers reviewed here are described in detail. In the major section of this article, we then categorize and summarize the studies. An appendix features an extensive list of resources useful for Wikipedia researchers.

show abstract

“…By applying such a system, encyclopedia articles can be more quickly classified, and essays that might damage and discredit the can be promptly removed or revised validity Wikipedia and users trust quickly removed or revised. According to the results achieved by Stvilia et al [51] in 2009 which showed that different communities have different models for measuring quality, the researchers of this paper have recommended such research to be done in other languages of Wikipedia encyclopaedia and its results utilized for raising the quality of encyclopaedia articles. The purpose of this study was to find the variables that would affect the quality of the Persian Wikipedia encyclopedia articles.…”

Section: Summery and Conclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Qualifying Articles of Persian Wikipedia Encyclopedia Through J48 Algorithm, ANFIS and Subtractive Clustering

Seyedsadr

Afsharkazemi²,

Nikoomaram³

2015

ACIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Since Wikipedia encyclopedia is one of the most popular web sites on the internet, providing accurate information is of abundant importance. In this research, the effective variables on quality of Persian articles are identified and a system is, then, designed for judging articles in three quality levels: high quality, cleanup needed, and deletion. First, the variables relating to the articles included in the list of featured articles, good articles, cleanup needed, and deletion articles are collected. Then, two methods are used for the analysis of data: First, a decision tree explains the relationships among the collected variables as rules that are implemented by adaptive neuro fuzzy interference system. Second, the data are implemented by subtractive clustering algorithm and the error of both methods is, finally, measured and compared. The results indicate that the average daily hits, total views, page length, total number of edits, total number of authors, and number of templates used are directly related to quality of Persian articles while the number of recent number of authors is inversely related to quality of articles.

show abstract

Issues of cross-contextual information quality evaluation—The case of Arabic, English, and Korean Wikipedias

Cited by 40 publications

References 15 publications

Manypedia: Comparing language points of view of Wikipedia communities

Manypedia: Comparing language points of view of Wikipedia communities

The People’s Encyclopedia Under the Gaze of the Sages: A Systematic Review of Scholarly Research on Wikipedia

Qualifying Articles of Persian Wikipedia Encyclopedia Through J48 Algorithm, ANFIS and Subtractive Clustering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About