DOCSLIB.ORG

Companies and Wikipedia: Friend Or Foe?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Companies and Wikipedia: Friend Or Foe? Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2017. Since 2008 COMPANIES AND WIKIPEDIA: FRIEND OR FOE? In this report: European, Italian, German and Swiss editions (Updated in May 2017) Wikipedia is the fifth most visited website in the world, with articles about companies perennially well positioned on the first page of search results. Yet despite this visibility, the articles about the 100 largest companies in Europe, the 100 largest in Italy, the 30 German companies included in the DAX 30 index and the 48 largest in Switzerland often lack information and present critical issues. With the already small number of active Wikipedia editors decreasing, this situation is likely to worsen. Some companies think that by editing articles about themselves they have an easy workaround. However, any company that does so runs the risk of violating Wikipedia’s rules, therefore creating a hostile environment. The potential resulting reputational backlash would be enormous. Since the first edition in 2008 our research revealed the low quality of the vast majority of company Wikipedia pages. For this reason, Lundquist has refined a set of tested guidelines, in order to help companies to safely approach the free encyclopedia as well as engage with its vast online community in a constructive manner. This proposed alliance entails abiding by Wikipedia’s rules so as to ensure information is accurate. When done correctly, a Wikipedia article is a win for both the encyclopedia and companies. 1 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015 LUNDQUIST WIKIPEDIA RESEARCH As part of its research into online corporate CONTENTS information, the Lundquist Wikipedia Research covers the article content of major corporations. THE STATE OF PLAY BETWEEN The latest research programmes look at: WIKIPEDIA AND COMPANIES • Wikipedia’s English language coverage of Europe’s top largest 100 companies (based on the FT500 index) European Edition p. 3 • The Italian language coverage of Italy’s top 100 companies • The English language coverage of the German DAX 30 1. Calling all editors p. 4 • The English language coverage of 48 Swiss listed companies 2. What we found out p. 5 3. Beware of the quick fix p. 6 RESEARCH FAST FACTS 4. Getting it right p. 9 Years running INSIGHT FROM WIKIMEDIA p. 10 29 4 Criteria Parts of the protocol: COUNTRY FOCUS Infobox, Features, Sections, Conversation Italy p. 14 & Acknowledgements 25 Germany p. 21 Maximum score Switzerland p. 26 65% European 43 Swiss average score average score HOW WE CONDUCTED 58% German 4 Italian p. 32 average score average score THE RESEARCH HOW WE CAN HELP & CONTACTS p. 33 For more information and to order a report please contact: DANIELE RIGHI Head of the Lundquist Wikipedia Research [email protected] 2 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 THE STATE OF PLAY BETWEEN WIKIPEDIA AND COMPANIES Wikipedia has been losing active editors for close to a decade while the majority of articles about companies on the encyclopedia remain weak. Here are the pitfalls to reaching for the quick fix and some tips for standing tall. VIOLATE 1/5 WIKIPEDIA RULES 1. CALLING ALL EDITORS 3. BEWARE OF THE QUICK FIX The number of active Wikipedia editors is dwindling, which Often companies, armed with the knowledge that the means fewer eyes and hands to update and improve the Wikipedia pages about them are inadequate and that encyclopedia’s pages. Therefore, information such as key the encyclopedia appears high in internet search results, financial data, historical notes and information on top succumb to the temptation to intervene directly to edit management, can be incomplete or prone to inaccuracy. their dedicated articles. We easily uncovered by a simple check a selection of 21 companies violating Wikipedia 2. POOR QUALITY OF PAGES (RESULTS OF THE RESEARCH) rules (whether by choosing a promotional name or directly Based on our screening of 29 criteria for a comprehensive intervening), which can expose them to reputational company article, which take into account what Wikipedia consequences including negative media coverage. recommends, the Lundquist Wikipedia Research 4. GETTING IT RIGHT revealed that companies 100 Since the research first launched in 2008, Lundquist’s averaged 65% of the total guidelines are helping companies understand and EUROPEAN COMPANIES score, compared with implement the correct procedures of engagement ASSESSED 66% in the last edition with the Wikipedia community. This allows companies of the research. which meet Wikipedia’s eligibility criteria to contribute transparently to improving their dedicated articles. The body of the Wikipedia article is usually the least complete section, with half of the largest 100 European companies (based on the FT500 index) dedicated articles scoring below 50% of the total score. One in five pages Wikipedia is an important player when shows an alert signaling an issue with the page (such as it comes to a company’s reputation, non-neutrality or a lack of references meaning the content yet its internal mechanism has is not verifiable as required by Wikipedia). Furthermore, been weakening over the last years the number of company articles with updated financial with the decline of active editors. figures has decreased by 27% since 2014. UBS obtained Furthermore, company articles are the top score followed by BP, BT Group and Enel. missing information. It is important for companies to engage constructively DECREASE IN with the online encyclopedia, in order -27% FINANCIAL FIGURES to ensure information is accurate. Joakim Lundquist, Founder of Lundquist UBS BP BT GROUP ENEL 2 1 3 5th 8 billion 60 MOST VISITED SITE ON THE WEB PAGEVIEWS EACH MONTH OF THE TIME (English Wikipedia) WIKIPEDIA RESULTS RANK IN THE FIRST PAGE OF GOOGLE 3 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 1. Calling all editors WIKIPEDIA PAGEVIEWS ARE MASSIVE Wikipedia pageviews grew on average by about 10% since 2010, totalling more than 9 billion in April 2015 (the metric used to assess pageviews has changed The major challenge for Wikipedia is since then with the aim to filter bot traffic, resulting the editing. It is in danger of imploding in 20% less pageviews: 8+ billion in March 2017). and the complexity of the issues it deals with is not going to get any easier. BUT SOMETHING’SDespite the WRONG visibility afforded to company articles on DespiteWikipedia, the visibility corporate afforded related to contents company on articlesthe encyclopedia Charlie Beckett, Director of POLIS, on Wikipedia,are suffering. corporate In fact, related our research contents show on that, the for instance, London School of Economics and Political Science’s journalism encyclopediathe number are ofsuffering. company entriesIn fact, with the updatednumber financialof think tank, in an interview with Lundquist for this research figures decreased by 27% since 2014. company articles in which financial data are missing or are outdated is on the rise (13% in 2014, 31% in 2015). Wikipedia relies on voluntary editors, who ensure content is regularly updated and reliable from a quality standpoint, and their numbers are dwindling. Very active editors (who edit content on Wikipedia a minimum of 100 times per month) have been decreasing over the last seven years with data showing there were only 3,367 in February 2017. Very active editors make up 0.01% of Wikipedia’s almost 31 million registered users (some people could have created multiple usernames over time, however the percentage is still staggeringly low). They are followed by 30,610 active editors (those who edit content on Wikipedia at least 5 times per month), representing only 0.1% of registered users. There is roughly 1 active editor for every 170 Wikipedia articles in English. This dearth of active editors starts from the lowest rung: only 3.7% of the almost 31 million registered users became “contributors” as of February 2017 (meaning they have reached the threshold of at least 10 edits on the encyclopedia since they arrived). This trend is also having an impact on articles about companies. DECREASING NUMBER OF ACTIVE AND VERY ACTIVE EDITORS ON THE ENGLISH WIKIPEDIA 50.000 Active editors (5+ edits) 45.000 Very active editors (100+ edits) 40.000 35.000 30.000 25.000 20.000 15.000 10.000 5.000 0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Source:Wikimedia 4 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 European Edition 2.What we found out Our research shows that Wikipedia articles about companies have issues and, compared to last year, less information. This page illustrates the main elements of a Wikipedia article about a company, along with some of the key research findings. Talk page: the article's content is discussed here. This is where issues emerge and debates take In 2015, of articles 1/5 place. 19% of articles have This icon identifies a good have at least an alert discussions about content that article: complete, neutral, which indicates an issue is considered problematic by elegant, verifiable and with the page. the editors' community. illustrated. UBS’s article, which tops our ranking, is a prime example. Article Talk Read Edit View history Search COMPANY NAME From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ALERT INFOBOX On Wikipedia, basic information Editors can put an alert banner if an issue is spotted (such as promotional contents is provided in this small box called: or lack of references). As you can see in the screenshot (“August 2009”), alerts can infobox. remain on the page for a very long time. Only 26% of articles In 2015, 81% of articles PAGE SECTION obtained the complete infobox have at least an overview Here is where companies’ related contents are. (10−15 sentences). However, score including financial of entries do not have History section figures and key people. 3 this section updated. The history section is among the most prevalent in articles about companies. Historical information contributes to justify the Wikipedia eligibility of an article.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Universality, Similarity, and Translation in the Wikipedia Inter-Language Link Network
    In Search of the Ur-Wikipedia: Universality, Similarity, and Translation in the Wikipedia Inter-language Link Network Morten Warncke-Wang1, Anuradha Uduwage1, Zhenhua Dong2, John Riedl1 1GroupLens Research Dept. of Computer Science and Engineering 2Dept. of Information Technical Science University of Minnesota Nankai University Minneapolis, Minnesota Tianjin, China {morten,uduwage,riedl}@cs.umn.edu [email protected] ABSTRACT 1. INTRODUCTION Wikipedia has become one of the primary encyclopaedic in- The world: seven seas separating seven continents, seven formation repositories on the World Wide Web. It started billion people in 193 nations. The world's knowledge: 283 in 2001 with a single edition in the English language and has Wikipedias totalling more than 20 million articles. Some since expanded to more than 20 million articles in 283 lan- of the content that is contained within these Wikipedias is guages. Criss-crossing between the Wikipedias is an inter- probably shared between them; for instance it is likely that language link network, connecting the articles of one edition they will all have an article about Wikipedia itself. This of Wikipedia to another. We describe characteristics of ar- leads us to ask whether there exists some ur-Wikipedia, a ticles covered by nearly all Wikipedias and those covered by set of universal knowledge that any human encyclopaedia only a single language edition, we use the network to under- will contain, regardless of language, culture, etc? With such stand how we can judge the similarity between Wikipedias a large number of Wikipedia editions, what can we learn based on concept coverage, and we investigate the flow of about the knowledge in the ur-Wikipedia? translation between a selection of the larger Wikipedias.
    [Show full text]
  • Volunteer Contributions to Wikipedia Increased During COVID-19 Mobility Restrictions
    Volunteer contributions to Wikipedia increased during COVID-19 mobility restrictions Thorsten Ruprechter1,*, Manoel Horta Ribeiro2, Tiago Santos1, Florian Lemmerich3, Markus Strohmaier3,4, Robert West2, and Denis Helic1 1Graz University of Technology, 8010 Graz, Austria 2EPFL, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland 3RWTH Aachen University, 52062 Aachen, Germany 4GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, 50667 Cologne, Germany *Corresponding author ([email protected]) Wikipedia, the largest encyclopedia ever created, is a global initiative driven by volunteer contribu- tions. When the COVID-19 pandemic broke out and mobility restrictions ensued across the globe, it was unclear whether Wikipedia volunteers would become less active in the face of the pandemic, or whether they would rise to meet the increased demand for high-quality information despite the added stress inflicted by this crisis. Analyzing 223 million edits contributed from 2018 to 2020 across twelve Wikipedia language editions, we find that Wikipedia’s global volunteer community responded remarkably to the pandemic, substantially increasing both productivity and the number of newcom- ers who joined the community. For example, contributions to the English Wikipedia increased by over 20% compared to the expectation derived from pre-pandemic data. Our work sheds light on the response of a global volunteer population to the COVID-19 crisis, providing valuable insights into the behavior of critical online communities under stress. Wikipedia is the world’s largest encyclopedia, one of the most prominent volunteer-based information systems in existence [18, 29], and one of the most popular destinations on the Web [2]. On an average day in 2019, users from around the world visited Wikipedia about 530 million times and editors voluntarily contributed over 870 thousand edits to one of Wikipedia’s language editions (Supplementary Table 1).
    [Show full text]
  • A Topic-Aligned Multilingual Corpus of Wikipedia Articles for Studying Information Asymmetry in Low Resource Languages
    Proceedings of the 12th Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2020), pages 2373–2380 Marseille, 11–16 May 2020 c European Language Resources Association (ELRA), licensed under CC-BY-NC A Topic-Aligned Multilingual Corpus of Wikipedia Articles for Studying Information Asymmetry in Low Resource Languages Dwaipayan Roy, Sumit Bhatia, Prateek Jain GESIS - Cologne, IBM Research - Delhi, IIIT - Delhi [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract Wikipedia is the largest web-based open encyclopedia covering more than three hundred languages. However, different language editions of Wikipedia differ significantly in terms of their information coverage. We present a systematic comparison of information coverage in English Wikipedia (most exhaustive) and Wikipedias in eight other widely spoken languages (Arabic, German, Hindi, Korean, Portuguese, Russian, Spanish and Turkish). We analyze the content present in the respective Wikipedias in terms of the coverage of topics as well as the depth of coverage of topics included in these Wikipedias. Our analysis quantifies and provides useful insights about the information gap that exists between different language editions of Wikipedia and offers a roadmap for the Information Retrieval (IR) community to bridge this gap. Keywords: Wikipedia, Knowledge base, Information gap 1. Introduction other with respect to the coverage of topics as well as Wikipedia is the largest web-based encyclopedia covering the amount of information about overlapping topics.
    [Show full text]
  • Multilingual Ranking of Wikipedia Articles with Quality and Popularity Assessment in Different Topics
    computers Article Multilingual Ranking of Wikipedia Articles with Quality and Popularity Assessment in Different Topics Włodzimierz Lewoniewski * , Krzysztof W˛ecel and Witold Abramowicz Department of Information Systems, Pozna´nUniversity of Economics and Business, 61-875 Pozna´n,Poland * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +48-(61)-639-27-93 Received: 10 May 2019; Accepted: 13 August 2019; Published: 14 August 2019 Abstract: On Wikipedia, articles about various topics can be created and edited independently in each language version. Therefore, the quality of information about the same topic depends on the language. Any interested user can improve an article and that improvement may depend on the popularity of the article. The goal of this study is to show what topics are best represented in different language versions of Wikipedia using results of quality assessment for over 39 million articles in 55 languages. In this paper, we also analyze how popular selected topics are among readers and authors in various languages. We used two approaches to assign articles to various topics. First, we selected 27 main multilingual categories and analyzed all their connections with sub-categories based on information extracted from over 10 million categories in 55 language versions. To classify the articles to one of the 27 main categories, we took into account over 400 million links from articles to over 10 million categories and over 26 million links between categories. In the second approach, we used data from DBpedia and Wikidata. We also showed how the results of the study can be used to build local and global rankings of the Wikipedia content.
    [Show full text]
  • The Culture of Wikipedia
    Good Faith Collaboration: The Culture of Wikipedia Good Faith Collaboration The Culture of Wikipedia Joseph Michael Reagle Jr. Foreword by Lawrence Lessig The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Web edition, Copyright © 2011 by Joseph Michael Reagle Jr. CC-NC-SA 3.0 Purchase at Amazon.com | Barnes and Noble | IndieBound | MIT Press Wikipedia's style of collaborative production has been lauded, lambasted, and satirized. Despite unease over its implications for the character (and quality) of knowledge, Wikipedia has brought us closer than ever to a realization of the centuries-old Author Bio & Research Blog pursuit of a universal encyclopedia. Good Faith Collaboration: The Culture of Wikipedia is a rich ethnographic portrayal of Wikipedia's historical roots, collaborative culture, and much debated legacy. Foreword Preface to the Web Edition Praise for Good Faith Collaboration Preface Extended Table of Contents "Reagle offers a compelling case that Wikipedia's most fascinating and unprecedented aspect isn't the encyclopedia itself — rather, it's the collaborative culture that underpins it: brawling, self-reflexive, funny, serious, and full-tilt committed to the 1. Nazis and Norms project, even if it means setting aside personal differences. Reagle's position as a scholar and a member of the community 2. The Pursuit of the Universal makes him uniquely situated to describe this culture." —Cory Doctorow , Boing Boing Encyclopedia "Reagle provides ample data regarding the everyday practices and cultural norms of the community which collaborates to 3. Good Faith Collaboration produce Wikipedia. His rich research and nuanced appreciation of the complexities of cultural digital media research are 4. The Puzzle of Openness well presented.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Contribute Climate Change Information to Wikipedia : a Guide
    HOW TO CONTRIBUTE CLIMATE CHANGE INFORMATION TO WIKIPEDIA Emma Baker, Lisa McNamara, Beth Mackay, Katharine Vincent; ; © 2021, CDKN This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction, provided the original work is properly credited. Cette œuvre est mise à disposition selon les termes de la licence Creative Commons Attribution (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode), qui permet l’utilisation, la distribution et la reproduction sans restriction, pourvu que le mérite de la création originale soit adéquatement reconnu. IDRC Grant/ Subvention du CRDI: 108754-001-CDKN knowledge accelerator for climate compatible development How to contribute climate change information to Wikipedia A guide for researchers, practitioners and communicators Contents About this guide .................................................................................................................................................... 5 1 Why Wikipedia is an important tool to communicate climate change information .................................................................................................................................. 7 1.1 Enhancing the quality of online climate change information ............................................. 8 1.2 Sharing your work more widely ......................................................................................................8 1.3 Why researchers should
    [Show full text]
  • Semantically Annotated Snapshot of the English Wikipedia
    Semantically Annotated Snapshot of the English Wikipedia Jordi Atserias, Hugo Zaragoza, Massimiliano Ciaramita, Giuseppe Attardi Yahoo! Research Barcelona, U. Pisa, on sabbatical at Yahoo! Research C/Ocata 1 Barcelona 08003 Spain {jordi, hugoz, massi}@yahoo-inc.com, [email protected] Abstract This paper describes SW1, the first version of a semantically annotated snapshot of the English Wikipedia. In recent years Wikipedia has become a valuable resource for both the Natural Language Processing (NLP) community and the Information Retrieval (IR) community. Although NLP technology for processing Wikipedia already exists, not all researchers and developers have the computational resources to process such a volume of information. Moreover, the use of different versions of Wikipedia processed differently might make it difficult to compare results. The aim of this work is to provide easy access to syntactic and semantic annotations for researchers of both NLP and IR communities by building a reference corpus to homogenize experiments and make results comparable. These resources, a semantically annotated corpus and a “entity containment” derived graph, are licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License and available from http://www.yr-bcn.es/semanticWikipedia. 1. Introduction 2. Processing Wikipedia1, the largest electronic encyclopedia, has be- Starting from the XML Wikipedia source we carried out a come a widely used resource for different Natural Lan- number of data processing steps: guage Processing tasks, e.g. Word Sense Disambiguation (Mihalcea, 2007), Semantic Relatedness (Gabrilovich and • Basic preprocessing: Stripping the text from the Markovitch, 2007) or in the Multilingual Question Answer- XML tags and dividing the obtained text into sen- ing task at Cross-Language Evaluation Forum (CLEF)2.
    [Show full text]
  • Florida State University Libraries
    )ORULGD6WDWH8QLYHUVLW\/LEUDULHV 2020 Wiki-Donna: A Contribution to a More Gender-Balanced History of Italian Literature Online Zoe D'Alessandro Follow this and additional works at DigiNole: FSU's Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected] THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS & SCIENCES WIKI-DONNA: A CONTRIBUTION TO A MORE GENDER-BALANCED HISTORY OF ITALIAN LITERATURE ONLINE By ZOE D’ALESSANDRO A Thesis submitted to the Department of Modern Languages and Linguistics in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation with Honors in the Major Degree Awarded: Spring, 2020 The members of the Defense Committee approve the thesis of Zoe D’Alessandro defended on April 20, 2020. Dr. Silvia Valisa Thesis Director Dr. Celia Caputi Outside Committee Member Dr. Elizabeth Coggeshall Committee Member Introduction Last year I was reading Una donna (1906) by Sibilla Aleramo, one of the most important ​ ​ works in Italian modern literature and among the very first explicitly feminist works in the Italian language. Wanting to know more about it, I looked it up on Wikipedia. Although there exists a full entry in the Italian Wikipedia (consisting of a plot summary, publishing information, and external links), the corresponding page in the English Wikipedia consisted only of a short quote derived from a book devoted to gender studies, but that did not address that specific work in great detail. As in-depth and ubiquitous as Wikipedia usually is, I had never thought a work as important as this wouldn’t have its own page. This discovery prompted the question: if this page hadn’t been translated, what else was missing? And was this true of every entry for books across languages, or more so for women writers? My work in expanding the entry for Una donna was the beginning of my exploration ​ ​ into the presence of Italian women writers in the Italian and English Wikipedias, and how it relates back to canon, Wikipedia, and gender studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Does Wikipedia Matter? the Effect of Wikipedia on Tourist Choices Marit Hinnosaar, Toomas Hinnosaar, Michael Kummer, and Olga Slivko Discus­­ Si­­ On­­ Paper No
    Dis cus si on Paper No. 15-089 Does Wikipedia Matter? The Effect of Wikipedia on Tourist Choices Marit Hinnosaar, Toomas Hinnosaar, Michael Kummer, and Olga Slivko Dis cus si on Paper No. 15-089 Does Wikipedia Matter? The Effect of Wikipedia on Tourist Choices Marit Hinnosaar, Toomas Hinnosaar, Michael Kummer, and Olga Slivko First version: December 2015 This version: September 2017 Download this ZEW Discussion Paper from our ftp server: http://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/dp/dp15089.pdf Die Dis cus si on Pape rs die nen einer mög lichst schnel len Ver brei tung von neue ren For schungs arbei ten des ZEW. Die Bei trä ge lie gen in allei ni ger Ver ant wor tung der Auto ren und stel len nicht not wen di ger wei se die Mei nung des ZEW dar. Dis cus si on Papers are inten ded to make results of ZEW research prompt ly avai la ble to other eco no mists in order to encou ra ge dis cus si on and sug gesti ons for revi si ons. The aut hors are sole ly respon si ble for the con tents which do not neces sa ri ly repre sent the opi ni on of the ZEW. Does Wikipedia Matter? The Effect of Wikipedia on Tourist Choices ∗ Marit Hinnosaar† Toomas Hinnosaar‡ Michael Kummer§ Olga Slivko¶ First version: December 2015 This version: September 2017 September 25, 2017 Abstract We document a causal influence of online user-generated information on real- world economic outcomes. In particular, we conduct a randomized field experiment to test whether additional information on Wikipedia about cities affects tourists’ choices of overnight visits.
    [Show full text]
  • Lessons from Citizendium
    Lessons from Citizendium Wikimania 2009, Buenos Aires, 28 August 2009 HaeB [[de:Benutzer:HaeB]], [[en:User:HaeB]] Please don't take photos during this talk. Citizendium Timeline ● September 2006: Citizendium announced. Sole founder: Larry Sanger, known as former editor-in-chief of Nupedia, chief organizer of Wikipedia (2001-2002), and later as Wikipedia critic ● October 2006: Started non-public pilot phase ● January 2007: “Big Unfork”: All unmodified copies of Wikipedia articles deleted ● March 2007: Public launch ● December 2007: Decision to use CC-BY-3.0, after debate about commercial reuse and compatibility with Wikipedia ● Mid-2009: Sanger largely inactive on Citizendium, focuses on WatchKnow ● August 2009: Larry Sanger announces he will step down as editor-in-chief soon (as committed to in 2006) Citizendium and Wikipedia: Similarities and differences ● Encyclopedia ● Strict real names ● Free license policy ● ● Open (anyone can Special role for contribute) experts: “editors” can issue content ● Created by amateurs decisions, binding to ● MediaWiki-based non-editors collaboration ● Governance: Social ● Non-profit contract, elements of a constitutional republic Wikipedian views of Citizendium ● Competitor for readers, contributions ● Ally, common goal of creating free encyclopedic content ● “Who?” ● In this talk: A long-time experiment testing several fundamental policy changes, in a framework which is still similar enough to that of Wikipedia to generate valuable evidence as to what their effect might be on WP Active editors: Waiting to explode ● Sanger (October 2007): ”At some point, possibly very soon, the Citizendium will grow explosively-- say, quadruple the number of its active contributors, or even grow by an order of magnitude ....“ © Aleksander Stos, CC-BY 3.0 Number of users that made at least one edit in each month Article creation rate: Still muddling Sanger (October 2007): “It's still possible that the project will, from here until eternity, muddle on creating 14 articles per day.
    [Show full text]
  • Wikipedia Matters∗
    Wikipedia Matters∗ Marit Hinnosaar† Toomas Hinnosaar‡ Michael Kummer§ Olga Slivko¶ September 29, 2017 Abstract We document a causal impact of online user-generated information on real-world economic outcomes. In particular, we conduct a randomized field experiment to test whether additional content on Wikipedia pages about cities affects tourists’ choices of overnight visits. Our treatment of adding information to Wikipedia increases overnight visits by 9% during the tourist season. The impact comes mostly from improving the shorter and incomplete pages on Wikipedia. These findings highlight the value of content in digital public goods for informing individual choices. JEL: C93, H41, L17, L82, L83, L86 Keywords: field experiment, user-generated content, Wikipedia, tourism industry 1 Introduction Asymmetric information can hinder efficient economic activity. In recent decades, the Internet and new media have enabled greater access to information than ever before. However, the digital divide, language barriers, Internet censorship, and technological con- straints still create inequalities in the amount of accessible information. How much does it matter for economic outcomes? In this paper, we analyze the causal impact of online information on real-world eco- nomic outcomes. In particular, we measure the impact of information on one of the primary economic decisions—consumption. As the source of information, we focus on Wikipedia. It is one of the most important online sources of reference. It is the fifth most ∗We are grateful to Irene Bertschek, Avi Goldfarb, Shane Greenstein, Tobias Kretschmer, Thomas Niebel, Marianne Saam, Greg Veramendi, Joel Waldfogel, and Michael Zhang as well as seminar audiences at the Economics of Network Industries conference in Paris, ZEW Conference on the Economics of ICT, and Advances with Field Experiments 2017 Conference at the University of Chicago for valuable comments.
    [Show full text]
  • Most Edited Wikipedia Articles
    Most Edited Wikipedia Articles Scrotal Jefferson mutualize that quinquennium miscount digressively and stalagmometer fleetly. Circumlocutional or perverted, Chariot never concentring any pomes! Nevins remains distressing after Ronald pugged new or smuggles any boondoggle. If we had such small small percentage of women contributing, then where are a rate of issues that will potentially be skewed or get right attention instead they should. Start with extensive and how accurate is written by signing up for slate and include the prefect exemplifies the king. Cancel culture: Have any two words become more weaponised? But wikipedia article is the most edited wikipedia the place on those contributors who they found the push them and to contribute to. Carrie Underwood for sufficient number one albums for different American Idol alumni. You edit wikipedia article links in editing, while the articles. They go the extra mile with professional graphics and a clean, modern layout. He became even invited to object at what school when someone who saw though he shared. We went on editing and edits are most. Review than other authors have written get them. The images were linked to her username; Lightbreather has been careful to make sure whether no more on Wikipedia knows her former name. Wikipedia edits as the zeitgeist of the internet. Chrome to soap the Pixel Helper. Slideshare, Blogger, and Quora. Further reading to an electronic encyclopedia britannica: removed duplicated grid style from the experts in places editing, university offers citations is each page pretty much forget! US Minor Outlying Is. Are They Getting the Most out of Them? Seo tool that wikipedia articles from editing wikipedia as an effect on.
    [Show full text]