DOCSLIB.ORG

Papers from the 2015 ICWSM Workshop

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

I CWSM Wikipedia, a Social Pedia: Research Challenges and Opportunities Papers from the 2015 ICWSM Workshop Technical Report WS-15-19 AAAI Press Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence Wikipedia, a Social Pedia: Research Challenges and Opportunities Papers from the 2015 ICWSM Workshop Technical Report WS-15-19 AAAI Press Palo Alto, California Copyright © 2015, AAAI Press The Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence 2275 East Bayshore Road, Suite 160 Palo Alto, California 94303 USA AAAI maintains compilation copyright for this technical report and retains the right of first refusal to any publication (including electronic distribution) arising from this AAAI event. Please do not make any inquiries or arrangements for hardcopy or electronic publication of all or part of the papers contained in these working notes without first explor- ing the options available through AAAI Press and AI Magazine (concur- rent submission to AAAI and an another publisher is not acceptable). A signed release of this right by AAAI is required before publication by a third party. Distribution of this technical report by any means including electronic (including, but not limited to the posting of the papers on any website) without permission is prohibited. ISBN 978-1-57735-737-7 WS-15-19 Manufactured in the United States of America Organizers Chairs Robert West (Stanford University) Leila Zia (Wikimedia Foundation) Jure Leskovec (Stanford University) iii This AAAI-sponsored workshop was collocated with ICWSM-15 and held Tuesday, May 26, 2015 in Oxford, UK iv Contents Preface / vii Robert West, Leila Zia, Jure Leskovec Wikipedia, Academia, and Science / 2 Eduard Aibar On the Evolution of Wikipedia: Dynamics of Categories and Articles / 6 Ramakrishna B. Bairi, Mark Carman, Ganesh Ramakrishnan Collaborative Visualizations for Wikipedia Critique and Activism / 11 Stefano De Sabbata, Kathryn Eccles, Scott Hale, Ralph Straumann, Arzu Çöltekin Unpacking the Structure of Knowledge Diffusion in Wikipedia: Local Biases, Noble Prizes and the Wisdom of Crowds / 17 Pierpaolo Dondio, Niccolò Casnici, Flaminio Squazzoni Eliciting Disease Data from Wikipedia Articles / 26 Geoffrey Fairchild, Sara Y. Del Valle, Lalindra De Silva, Alberto M. Segre What Women Like: A Gendered Analysis of Twitter Users' Interests Based on a Twixonomy / 34 Stefano Faralli, Giovanni Stilo, Paola Velardi A Lightly Supervised Approach to Role Identification in Wikipedia Talk Page Discussions / 43 Oliver Ferschke, Diyi Yang, Carolyn P. Rosé Towards Better Visual Tools for Exploring Wikipedia Article Development — The Use Case of "Gamergate Controversy" / 48 Fabian Flöck, David Laniado, Felix Stadthaus, Maribel Acosta Let's Talk about Talks: Supporting Knowledge Exchange Processes on Wiki Discussion Pages / 56 Sven Heimbuch, Daniel Bodemer Inconsistency between Salience and the Dynamics of Changes: The Information War on Wikipedia (Research Proposal) / 62 Elena Labzina Quo Vadis? On the Effects of Wikipedia's Policies on Navigation / 64 Daniel Lamprecht, Denis Helic, Markus Strohmaier User Engagement on Wikipedia: A Review of Studies of Readers and Editors / 67 Marc Miquel Ribé v Determining the Influence of Reddit Posts on Wikipedia Pageviews / 75 Daniel Moyer, Samuel L. Carson, Thayne Keegan Dye, Richard T. Carson, David Goldbaum Multilingual Wikipedia: Editors of Primary Language Contribute to More Complex Articles / 83 Sungjoon Park, Suin Kim, Scott A. Hale, Sooyoung Kim, Jeongmin Byun, Alice Oh Exploratory Access to Wikipedia through Faceted Dynamic Taxonomies / 89 Giovanni Maria Sacco The Transmission of Scientific Knowledge to Wikipedia / 96 Misha Teplitskiy, Grace Lu, Eamon Duede vi Preface Wikipedia is one of the most popular sites on the Web, a main source of knowledge for a large fraction of Internet users, and one of very few projects that make not only their con- tent but also many activity logs available to the public. For these reasons, Wikipedia has become an important object of study for researchers across many subfields of the computa- tional and social sciences, such as social-network analysis, social psychology, education, anthropology, political science, human-computer interaction, cognitive science, artificial intelligence, linguistics, and natural-language processing. The goal of this workshop is to create a forum for researchers exploring all social aspects of Wikipedia, including the cre- ation and consumption of content, participation in discussions and their dynamics, task management and the evolution of hierarchies, finding consensus on editorial issues, etc. With a member of the Wikimedia Foundation's research team in the organizing committee and a keynote speaker from the Foundation, we aim to establish a direct exchange of ideas between the organization that operates Wikipedia and the researchers that are interested in studying it. – Robert West, Leila Zia, Jure Leskovec vii I CWSM Workshop Papers Wikipedia, a Social Pedia: Research Challenges and Opportunities: Papers from the 2015 ICWSM Workshop Wikipedia, Academia, and Science Eduard Aibar Universitat Oberta de Catalunya [email protected] Abstract issues, in order to see how the non-expert nature of most of This paper presents some results of an ongoing research its editors and the open collaborative style of Wikipedia project on the interactions between Wikipedia and academ- shapes the way science and technology issues are depicted ia. The first part of the project analyses the perception and in its articles. practices of academic faculty about Wikipedia. It also in- cludes a study on 52 teaching experiences at universities around the world where lecturers have used Wikipedia for designing assignments involving students to edit the free Wikipedia and Academic Faculty encyclopedia. The second part of the project, still ongoing, Recent empirical studies show that Wikipedia is heavily is aimed at analyzing the scientific content of Wikipedia, in and frequently used by a large majority of university stu- order to see how the non-expert nature of most of its editors shapes the way science and technology issues are presented dents to carry out different assignments and tasks in its articles. (Wannemacher and Schulenburg 2010). Though there are very few studies with substantive empirical data on the attitude of university faculty members about Wikipedia– Introduction see, as a recent exception, Soules (2015)–the common view is that they do not seem to be so positive: academics Though so-called commons-based peer production and scientists are thought to perceive Wikipedia with skep- (Benkler 2006) projects share many features with tradi- ticism or cynicism and very few become actual editors, tional scientific practices–peer review, open publication of improving or creating articles. results, intensive collaboration and commons-oriented Our study is based on a large online survey (913 valid production–there are also important differences regarding responses) to all faculty members (3,639 people) in two authorship, publishing, collaboration styles, and laypeople large public universities in Catalonia, Spain (Universitat involvement. The present movement towards Open Sci- Oberta de Catalunya and Universitat Pompeu Fabra) in ence and Open Research pleads for importing some peer order to analyze their perceptions, attitudes and practices production mechanisms into the realm of science and aca- on Wikipedia. Our results show (±2.81% for overall data in demia (Nielsen 2011), but it is not clear whether both cul- the case of maximum uncertainty; p=q=0.5; confidence tures and ways of knowledge production are fully compati- level 95%) that the overall quality of Wikipedia articles is ble. highly valued and most faculty members are also regular Our research project tries to explore the interactions users, mainly for information seeking. between these two realms–science and Wikipedia–and The results of our survey do not support, contrary to analyze possible conflicts, tensions or mutual enrichment widespread opinion, an overwhelming negative or skepti- processes. To put it bluntly we are interested to see both cal attitude among university faculty towards Wikipedia. (1) what scientists do and think about Wikipedia and (2) On the one hand, not only do most of them see it as a use- what Wikipedia does to science. The first part of the pro- ful teaching recourse (46.8%, while only 18.8% don’t) but ject, already completed, studies the perception and practic- few feel uncomfortable about students using it as a source of information (23.1%). On the other hand, the overall es of academic faculty–taken as a good proxy for ‘scien- quality of Wikipedia articles is rather positively valued. tists’–about Wikipedia. The second part, still ongoing, is From the three questions asking about quality, reliability aimed at analyzing the scientific content of Wikipedia, i.e. and updating got a striking majority of positive answers– the subset of articles dealing with science and technology only articles’ comprehensiveness received a slightly nega- tive evaluation. The common assumption that most faculty Copyright © 2015, Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelli- members perceive Wikipedia as an inaccurate and unrelia- gence (www.aaai.org). All rights reserved. ble source of information is not supported by our survey. 2 When considering their level of use of Wikipedia both Science and Technology in Wikipedia for professional and personal matters but without focusing specifically on teaching activities,
Recommended publications
  • QUARTERLY CHECK-IN Technology (Services) TECH GOAL QUADRANT

    QUARTERLY CHECK-IN Technology (Services) TECH GOAL QUADRANT

    QUARTERLY CHECK-IN Technology (Services) TECH GOAL QUADRANT C Features that we build to improve our technology A Foundation level goals offering B Features we build for others D Modernization, renewal and tech debt goals The goals in each team pack are annotated using this scheme illustrate the broad trends in our priorities Agenda ● CTO Team ● Research and Data ● Design Research ● Performance ● Release Engineering ● Security ● Technical Operations Photos (left to right) Technology (Services) CTO July 2017 quarterly check-in All content is © Wikimedia Foundation & available under CC BY-SA 4.0, unless noted otherwise. CTO Team ● Victoria Coleman - Chief Technology Officer ● Joel Aufrecht - Program Manager (Technology) ● Lani Goto - Project Assistant ● Megan Neisler - Senior Project Coordinator ● Sarah Rodlund - Senior Project Coordinator ● Kevin Smith - Program Manager (Engineering) Photos (left to right) CHECK IN TEAM/DEPT PROGRAM WIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION July 2017 CTO 4.5 [LINK] ANNUAL PLAN GOAL: expand and strengthen our technical communities What is your objective / Who are you working with? What impact / deliverables are you expecting? workflow? Program 4: Technical LAST QUARTER community building (none) Outcome 5: Organize Wikimedia Developer Summit NEXT QUARTER Objective 1: Developer Technical Collaboration Decide on event location, dates, theme, deadlines, etc. Summit web page and publicize the information published four months before the event (B) STATUS: OBJECTIVE IN PROGRESS Technology (Services) Research and Data July, 2017 quarterly
  • Measuring Self-Focus Bias in Community-Maintained Knowledge Repositories

    Measuring Self-Focus Bias in Community-Maintained Knowledge Repositories

    Measuring Self-Focus Bias in Community-Maintained Knowledge Repositories Brent Hecht† and Darren Gergle†‡ †Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science ‡Dept. of Communication Studies Northwestern University [email protected], [email protected] ABSTRACT In this paper, we explore this question by introducing and Self-focus is a novel way of understanding a type of bias in measuring self-focus, a new way of understanding a type of bias in community-maintained Web 2.0 graph structures. It goes beyond the graph structures that underlie many of these community- previous measures of topical coverage bias by encapsulating both maintained repositories, including one of the largest: Wikipedia. node- and edge-hosted biases in a single holistic measure of an We define self-focus bias as occurring when contributors to a entire community-maintained graph. We outline two methods to knowledge repository encode information that is important and quantify self-focus, one of which is very computationally correct to them and a large proportion of contributors to the same inexpensive, and present empirical evidence for the existence of repository, but not important and correct to contributors of similar self-focus using a “hyperlingual” approach that examines 15 repositories. different language editions of Wikipedia. We suggest applications Self-focus bias is similar to topical coverage biases [8, 11] in that of our methods and discuss the risks of ignoring self-focus bias in it seeks to describe the semantic makeup of knowledge technological applications. repositories. Topical coverage bias studies explicitly or implicitly compare the distribution of articles (or a similar measure) in Categories and Subject Descriptors particular semantic categories in Wikipedia to that of a more H.5.3 [Information Systems]: Group and Organization Interfaces traditional knowledge repository, generally in an effort to show – collaborative computing, computer-supported cooperative work, that Wikipedia describes in more detail semantic areas that are of theory and models.
  • Dictionary of Slovenian Exonyms Explanatory Notes

    Dictionary of Slovenian Exonyms Explanatory Notes

    GEOGRAFSKI INŠTITUT ANTONA MELIKA ZNANSTVENORAZISKOVALNI CENTER SLOVENSKE AKADEMIJE ZNANOSTI IN UMETNOSTI ANTON MELIK GEOGRAPHICAL INSTITUTE OF ZRC SAZU DICTIONARY OF SLOVENIAN EXONYMS EXPLANATORY NOTES Drago Kladnik Drago Perko AMGI ZRC SAZU Ljubljana 2013 1 Preface The geocoded collection of Slovenia exonyms Zbirka slovenskih eksonimov and the dictionary of Slovenina exonyms Slovar slovenskih eksonimov have been set up as part of the research project Slovenski eksonimi: metodologija, standardizacija, GIS (Slovenian Exonyms: Methodology, Standardization, GIS). They include more than 5,000 of the most frequently used exonyms that were collected from more than 50,000 documented various forms of these types of geographical names. The dictionary contains thirty-four categories and has been designed as a contribution to further standardization of Slovenian exonyms, which can be added to on an ongoing basis and used to find information on Slovenian exonym usage. Currently, their use is not standardized, even though analysis of the collected material showed that the differences are gradually becoming smaller. The standardization of public, professional, and scholarly use will allow completely unambiguous identification of individual features and items named. By determining the etymology of the exonyms included, we have prepared the material for their final standardization, and by systematically documenting them we have ensured that this important aspect of the Slovenian language will not sink into oblivion. The results of this research will not only help preserve linguistic heritage as an important aspect of Slovenian cultural heritage, but also help preserve national identity. Slovenian exonyms also enrich the international treasury of such names and are undoubtedly important part of the world’s linguistic heritage.
  • Europe and Media: the History on the Web France, Great Britain, Hungary, Italy, Slovenia, Spain

    Europe and Media: the History on the Web France, Great Britain, Hungary, Italy, Slovenia, Spain

    Europe and media: the History on the Web France, Great Britain, Hungary, Italy, Slovenia, Spain 1 11 In this volume of “Il Filo d’Europa” we bring out the first research re- port made by Istituto storico Parri Emilia-Romagna with Europe Di- rect Emilia-Romagna and Videoteca of Legislative Assembly of the Emilia-Romagna Region, for the project “Europe and media: the hi- story in the web”. We continue in this way our engagement, after the conclusion of the project that has investigated the European history on the na- tional televisions, in order to understand how history is described through the new media and to imagine together a possible Euro- pean history. Stefania Fenati Istituto Storico Parri Emilia-Romagna The Istituto Storico Parri Emilia-Romagna was established in 1963. Its mission is to promote retrieval and knowledge of contemporary history’s sources. The main objective of the Institute is the study and research of the history of the 20th century. Videoteca Regionale The Regional Video Library was established in 1996 by the Legisla- tive Assembly of the Region Emilia-Romagna in collaboration with Istituto Beni Culturali, Artistici e Naturali. It is part of the Library of the Legislative Assembly of the Region Emilia-Romagna. Europe Direct of Emilia-Romagna The Europe Direct network is the main instrument used by the Eu- ropean institutions to encourage contacts with regional territories and citizens. It acts as intermediary between the EU and citizens at local level and allows citizens to have information, advice, assistan- ce and answers on EU policies and funding, and an opportunity to communicate with European institutions as well.
  • Cultural Identities in Wikipedias

    Cultural Identities in Wikipedias

    Cultural Identities in Wikipedias Marc Miquel-Ribé David Laniado Universitat Pompeu Fabra Eurecat Roc Boronat, 138, 08018, Barcelona, Av. Diagonal, 177, 080018, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain Catalonia, Spain [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT 1. INTRODUCTION Wikipedia is self-defined as "a free-access, free-content Internet In this paper we study identity-based motivation in Wikipedia as encyclopedia”1. When Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger started a drive for editors to act congruently with their cultural identity Wikipedia in 2001, they were already developing a free values by contributing with content related to them. To assess its encyclopedia called Nupedia with this same purpose. It was the influence, we developed a computational method to identify implementation of the wiki technology that completely changed articles related to the cultural identities associated to a language their approach by allowing collaborative modifications directly and applied it to 40 Wikipedia language editions. The results from the browser. This grew into the current site we know. The show that about a quarter of each Wikipedia language edition is result is a dual object: a social network that also serves the dedicated to represent the corresponding cultural identities. The purpose of creating a knowledge repository. However, , topical coverage of these articles reflects that geography, Wikipedia does not encourage editors to build their identities biographies, and culture are the most common themes, although based on personal traits, biography and social affinities2, which each language shows its idiosyncrasy and other topics are also is different from other online communities. Instead, Wikipedians present. The majority of these articles remain exclusive to each are valued according to their activity, their writing skills, the language, which is consistent with the idea that a Cultural languages they speak or acknowledgements they have received Identity is defined in relation to others; as entangled and from other peers, such as barnstars3 and praising comments.
  • Is Wikipedia Really Neutral? a Sentiment Perspective Study of War-Related Wikipedia Articles Since 1945

    Is Wikipedia Really Neutral? a Sentiment Perspective Study of War-Related Wikipedia Articles Since 1945

    PACLIC 29 Is Wikipedia Really Neutral? A Sentiment Perspective Study of War-related Wikipedia Articles since 1945 Yiwei Zhou, Alexandra I. Cristea and Zachary Roberts Department of Computer Science University of Warwick Coventry, United Kingdom fYiwei.Zhou, A.I.Cristea, [email protected] Abstract include books, journal articles, newspapers, web- pages, sound recordings2, etc. Although a “Neutral Wikipedia is supposed to be supporting the 3 “Neutral Point of View”. Instead of accept- point of view” (NPOV) is Wikipedia’s core content ing this statement as a fact, the current paper policy, we believe sentiment expression is inevitable analyses its veracity by specifically analysing in this user-generated content. Already in (Green- a typically controversial (negative) topic, such stein and Zhu, 2012), researchers have raised doubt as war, and answering questions such as “Are about Wikipedia’s neutrality, as they pointed out there sentiment differences in how Wikipedia that “Wikipedia achieves something akin to a NPOV articles in different languages describe the across articles, but not necessarily within them”. same war?”. This paper tackles this chal- Moreover, people of different language backgrounds lenge by proposing an automatic methodology based on article level and concept level senti- share different cultures and sources of information. ment analysis on multilingual Wikipedia arti- These differences have reflected on the style of con- cles. The results obtained so far show that rea- tributions (Pfeil et al., 2006) and the type of informa- sons such as people’s feelings of involvement tion covered (Callahan and Herring, 2011). Further- and empathy can lead to sentiment expression more, Wikipedia webpages actually allow to con- differences across multilingual Wikipedia on tain opinions, as long as they come from reliable au- war-related topics; the more people contribute thors4.
  • The Year According to Annual Report 2008–2009

    The Year According to Annual Report 2008–2009

    the year according to Wikimedia Foundation annual report 2008–2009 The mission of the Wikimedia 1 Foundation is to empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational Imagine a world in which content under a free license or in the every single person public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally. Cover and this page: photos by Lane Hartwell on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge. In collaboration with a network of established by Jimmy Wales in 2003, chapters, the Foundation provides two years after creating Wikipedia, the essential infrastructure and an to build a long-term future for free That’s what we’re doing. organizational framework for the support knowledge projects on the Internet. and development of multilingual wiki It is based in San Francisco, California, projects and other endeavors which serve and has a staff of 34. Its job is to this mission. The Foundation will make maintain the technical infrastructure —Jimmy Wales, Founder of Wikipedia and keep useful information from its for Wikipedia and its sister projects, projects available on the Internet free of including MediaWiki, the software that charge, in perpetuity. powers them. It also manages programs and partnerships that extend the mission, We are the non-profit, 501(c)3 charitable and supports, in a variety of ways, the foundation that operates Wikipedia volunteers who write the projects. It and other free knowledge projects. also manages legal, administrative and The Wikimedia Foundation was financial operations. How we are organized Programs Technology Fundraising and Strategic Planning focuses on furthering delivers the platform Administration works with awareness of the that powers the provides legal, volunteers, advisors Wikimedia projects, Foundation’s projects fundraising and and stakeholders increasing the and works to improve administrative around the world number of editors, the usability and support for the to develop the and supporting the functionality of Wikimedia projects.
  • Mining Cross-Cultural Relations from Wikipedia - a Study of 31 European Food Cultures

    Mining Cross-Cultural Relations from Wikipedia - a Study of 31 European Food Cultures

    Mining cross-cultural relations from Wikipedia - A study of 31 European food cultures Paul Laufer Claudia Wagner Graz University of Technology GESIS & U. of Koblenz Graz, Austria Cologne, Germany [email protected] [email protected] Fabian Flöck Markus Strohmaier GESIS GESIS & U. of Koblenz Cologne, Germany Cologne, Germany fabian.fl[email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT the editor community of the Romanian-language Wikipedia For many people, Wikipedia represents one of the primary could either have a deviant mental picture of the French sources of knowledge about foreign cultures. Yet, differ- cuisine { or it might estimate the priorities of Romanian- ent Wikipedia language editions offer different descriptions speaking readers to rather be on meat-based French deli- of cultural practices. Unveiling diverging representations of catessen than on wine and baking goods. Further, the gen- cultures provides an important insight, since they may foster eral interest of the Romanian-speaking readers in the French the formation of cross-cultural stereotypes, misunderstand- cuisine (for example measured by the number of views of the ings and potentially even conflict. In this work, we explore article about French cuisine in the Romanian language edi- to what extent the descriptions of cultural practices in var- tion) might serve to potentially displease any Francophile, ious European language editions of Wikipedia differ on the since the Romanian speaking community might show no- example of culinary practices and propose an approach to tably less interest in the French kitchen than in the Russian mine cultural relations between different language commu- or Hungarian one. This hypothetical scenario serves as an nities trough their description of and interest in their own example for numerous similar real-world cases (which can- and other communities' food culture.
  • Highlighting Entanglement of Cultures Via Ranking of Multilingual Wikipedia Articles

    Highlighting Entanglement of Cultures Via Ranking of Multilingual Wikipedia Articles

    Highlighting Entanglement of Cultures via Ranking of Multilingual Wikipedia Articles Young-Ho Eom, Dima L. Shepelyansky* Laboratoire de Physique The´orique du CNRS, IRSAMC, Universite´ de Toulouse, UPS, Toulouse, France Abstract How different cultures evaluate a person? Is an important person in one culture is also important in the other culture? We address these questions via ranking of multilingual Wikipedia articles. With three ranking algorithms based on network structure of Wikipedia, we assign ranking to all articles in 9 multilingual editions of Wikipedia and investigate general ranking structure of PageRank, CheiRank and 2DRank. In particular, we focus on articles related to persons, identify top 30 persons for each rank among different editions and analyze distinctions of their distributions over activity fields such as politics, art, science, religion, sport for each edition. We find that local heroes are dominant but also global heroes exist and create an effective network representing entanglement of cultures. The Google matrix analysis of network of cultures shows signs of the Zipf law distribution. This approach allows to examine diversity and shared characteristics of knowledge organization between cultures. The developed computational, data driven approach highlights cultural interconnections in a new perspective. Dated: June 26, 2013 Citation: Eom Y-H, Shepelyansky DL (2013) Highlighting Entanglement of Cultures via Ranking of Multilingual Wikipedia Articles. PLoS ONE 8(10): e74554. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0074554 Editor: Matjaz Perc, University of Maribor, Slovenia Received June 26, 2013; Accepted August 5, 2013; Published October 3, 2013 Copyright: ß 2013 Eom, Shepelyansky. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
  • Understanding Social Media Through Large Volume Measurements

    Understanding Social Media Through Large Volume Measurements

    Department of Computer Science Series of Publications A Report A-2019-4 Understanding Social Media through Large Volume Measurements Ossi Karkulahti Doctoral dissertation, to be presented for public discussion with the permission of the Faculty of Science of the University of Helsinki, in Auditorium PII, Porthania building, on the 9th of October, 2019 at 12 o’clock. University of Helsinki Finland Supervisor Jussi Kangasharju, University of Helsinki, Finland Pre-examiners Mourad Oussalah, University of Oulu, Finland Jari Veijalainen, University of Jyv¨askyl¨a, Finland Opponent Yang Chen, Fudan University, China Custos Jussi Kangasharju, University of Helsinki, Finland Contact information Department of Computer Science P.O. Box 68 (Pietari Kalmin katu 5) FI-00014 University of Helsinki Finland Email address: [email protected].fi URL: http://cs.helsinki.fi/ Telephone: +358 2941 911 Copyright c 2019 Ossi Karkulahti ISSN 1238-8645 ISBN 978-951-51-5508-5 (paperback) ISBN 978-951-51-5509-2 (PDF) Helsinki 2019 Unigrafia Understanding Social Media through Large Volume Measurements Ossi Karkulahti Department of Computer Science P.O. Box 68, FI-00014 University of Helsinki, Finland ossi.karkulahti@helsinki.fi https://cs.helsinki.fi/Ossi.Karkulahti/ PhD Thesis, Series of Publications A, Report A-2019-4 Helsinki, October 2019, 116 pages ISSN 1238-8645 ISBN 978-951-51-5508-5 (paperback) ISBN 978-951-51-5509-2 (PDF) Abstract The amount of user-generated web content has grown drastically in the past 15 years and many social media services are exceedingly popular nowa- days. In this thesis we study social media content creation and consumption through large volume measurements of three prominent social media ser- vices, namely Twitter, YouTube, and Wikipedia.
  • Wikimedia Foundation

    Wikimedia Foundation

    Wikimedia Foundation A n n uAl 2007 2008 RepoRt [About the Wikimedia Foundation] We are the non-profit, 501(c)3 charitable foundation that operates Wikipedia and other free knowledge projects. The Foundation was established by Jimmy Wales in 2003, two years after creating Wikipedia, to build a long-term future for free knowledge projects on the internet. The Foundation, now based in San Francisco, California, maintains the technical infrastructure, software, and servers that allow millions of people every day to freely use Wikipedia and its sister projects. The Foundation also manages programs and partnerships that extend our basic mission: to expand free knowledge around the world. With just over 20 paid staff, the Foundation is the official representative for its projects, offering legal, administrative, and financial support. The Foundation is also responsible for conducting a range of fundraising activities, including the annual community giving campaign, to finance our annual plan and operations overhead. FRONT COVER: Wikimania 2007 volunteers photo by Everlong; CC-BY-SA from Wikimedia Commons 2007 2008 Annual Report [Mission Statement] Empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally. wikimediafoundation.org This annual report covers the Foundation’s 2007/2008 fiscal year: July 1, 2007 through June 30, 2008. [ 2 ] {Letter from the Executive Director} >> The Wikimedia Foundation is the organization behind Wikipedia, the world’s largest and most popular encyclopedia, and the only website in the global top 5 that’s run by a non-profit.

  • Wikimedia Research Newsletter Volume 4 (2014) Contents

    Wikimedia Research Newsletter Volume 4 (2014) Contents 1 About 1 1.1 Facts and figures ............................................ 1 1.2 How to subscribe ........................................... 1 1.3 How to contribute ........................................... 2 1.4 Open access vs. closed access publications .............................. 2 1.5 Archives ................................................ 3 1.5.1 Volume 6 (2016) ....................................... 3 1.5.2 Volume 5 (2015) ....................................... 3 1.5.3 Volume 4 (2014) ....................................... 3 1.5.4 Volume 3 (2013) ....................................... 3 1.5.5 Volume 2 (2012) ....................................... 3 1.5.6 Volume 1 (2011) ....................................... 4 1.5.7 Search the WRN archives ................................... 4 1.6 Contact ................................................ 4 2 Issue 4(1): January 2014 5 2.0.1 Translation students embrace Wikipedia assignments, but find user interface frustrating ... 5 2.1 Briefly ................................................. 6 2.1.1 References .......................................... 7 3 Issue 4(2): February 2014 8 3.0.2 CSCW '14 retrospective ................................... 8 3.0.3 Clustering Wikipedia editors by their biases ......................... 9 3.0.4 Monthly research showcase launched ............................. 9 3.0.5 Study of AfD debates: Did the SOPA protests mellow deletionists? ............. 9 3.0.6 Word frequency analysis identifies “four