A Content Analysis: How Wikipedia Talk Pages Are Used (WebSci2010 poster)

A Content Analysis: How Wikipedia Talk Pages Are Used Jodi Schneider, Alexandre Passant & John G. Breslin Motivation Content Analysis Semantic Web Wikipedia’s coordination costs—the We used 15 comment types; Opportunities number of Talk page edits for each a comment could have multiple types. We propose structured, meaningful article edit—have increased We started with Viégas’ 11 types [2]: annotations: the type of comment. dramatically [1]: 1. Requests for editing coordination Comment types could enable new ways to browse Talk pages, using 2. Requests for information Semantic Web technologies. We 3. References to vandalism could instantaneously gather and 4. References to guidelines/policies show all comments of a certain type. 5. References to internal resources 6. Off-topic remarks We have created a lightweight ontology, based on SIOC, where 7. Polls classes in the ontology correspond 8. Requests for peer review to common comment types we identified in the content analysis [4]: 9. Information boxes http://rdfs.org/sioc/wikitalk We are analyzing Talk pages to 10. Images suggest how Semantic Web Users would tick checkboxes to 11. Other technologies (like structured indicate a comment’s type(s). annotations) could improve We added 4 new types: coordination. 1. References to external sources A JavaScript plugin could then A typical discussion in a Wikipedia Talk page 2. Discussing reverts/removed highlight only certain comment types material/controversial edits —for instance all “References to 3. Reference to edits made oneself external sources”. With SPARQL, we could show all “help requests” from a 4. Recruiting help for another article/ group of pages. portal Talk page postings by type. ‘Coordination’ is the most common type of comment. Comment types depend on the page type. Discussions of ‘reverts/removed material/controversial edits’ are three times as likely on Talk pages of controversial articles. Method ‘Guidelines’ and ‘sources’ are commonly discussed. We are examining 100 Talk pages, 20 Info boxes are common in from each of these categories: “most views” and 1.  Articles with the most contributors “controversial” samples. 2.  Most-viewed articles 3.  Controversial articles 4.  Featured Articles 5.  Random sample This will help us to identify the types of conversations and the variance between References Acknowledgements pages. Existing studies focus on 1 or 2 [1] B. Stvilia, M.B. Twidale, L.C. Smith, and L. Gasser, “Information Quality Work Organization in Wikipedia,” JASIST, vol. 59, 2008, pp. 983-1001. The work presented in this paper has article types and use small sample [2] F.B. Viegas, M. Wattenberg, J. Kriss, and F.V. Ham, “Talk Before You Type: been funded by Science Foundation sizes of 6 to 60 articles. Coordination in Wikipedia,” HICSS 2007, pp. 78-87. [3] J. Schneider, A. Passant, and Breslin, John G., “A Content Analysis: How Wikipedia Talk Pages Are Used,” WebScience 2010, Raleigh, North Carolina. Ireland under Grant No. SFI/08/CE/ [4] ibid, “Enhancing MediaWiki Talk pages with Semantics for Better Coordination I1380 (Líon-2). - A Proposal,” The Fifth Workshop on Semantic Wikis: Linking Data and People at the 7th Extended Semantic Web Conference (ESWC), Crete, Greece: 2010.

A Content Analysis: How Wikipedia Talk Pages Are Used (WebSci2010 poster)

by jodischneider

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

Statistics

A Content Analysis: How Wikipedia Talk Pages Are Used (WebSci2010 poster) Document Transcript