網路城邦
回本城市首頁 時事論壇
市長:胡卜凱  副市長:
加入本城市推薦本城市加入我的最愛訂閱最新文章
udn城市政治社會政治時事【時事論壇】城市/討論區/
討論區知識和議題 字體:
看回應文章  上一個討論主題 回文章列表 下一個討論主題
維基百科的資訊有多可靠?-J. Hsu
 瀏覽1,727|回應1推薦1

胡卜凱
等級:8
留言加入好友
文章推薦人 (1)

胡卜凱

Wikipedia: How Accurate Is It?

Jeremy Hsu, Special to TopTenREVIEWS

Wikipedia may represent the world's most popular online encyclopedia, but its crowd-sourced approach presents some pitfalls for the unwary. A recent cautionary tale comes from baseball fans vandalizing the wiki pages of Yankees and Phillies players during the latest World Series matchup, as first noted by MyFoxPhilly.com.

Perhaps few Wikipedia readers would believe the obvious slurs and insults posted on player pages, and editors work quickly to remove the misinformation. But the incident once again highlights how easily any anonymous person can edit the information on the free, online encyclopedia — although Wikipedia plans to restrict anonymous edits for biographical entries about living people by the end of this year. "Flagged revisions" will still allow anonymous users to submit changes, except that such submissions will require editor approval before going live.

The change would help eliminate incidents such as the World Series Wikipedia vandalism, as well as an earlier Wikipedia hoax that fooled UK, Indian and Australian journalists. An Irish college student intentionally planted a fake quote in Wikipedia that he attributed to French composer Maurice Jarre, shortly after Jarre's death in May.  That tricked a number of newspapers into including the quote in their obituaries.

Missing or wrong information on Wikipedia could have more serious consequences.

A survey this year found that up to 50 percent of physicians consult Wikipedia for medical information, despite a 2008 study that found certain drug pages miss vital health information about side effects. Wikipedia may also unintentionally encourage lazy or gullible students who cite it as a primary source in their papers, which leads to perennial complaints by teachers and professors.

Still, misuse of Wikipedia by readers and contributors does not diminish the encyclopedia's huge accomplishments as a crowd-sourcing experiment. Dartmouth researchers found that much of Wikipedia's success depends not only upon registered, dedicated users, but also relies upon many anonymous "Good Samaritans" who might contribute just once.

A 2005 study by the journal Nature found Wikipedia roughly as accurate as the Encyclopedia Britannica, and a 2008 study in the journal Reference Services Review pegged Wikipedia's accuracy rate at 80 percent compared to 95-96 percent among other sources — not bad for a free, crowd-sourced encyclopedia.

Well-sourced articles written according to Wikipedia guidelines should have citations listed at the bottom of each page, with links to other information sources. This means that savvy readers can use Wikipedia as an information hub to follow the link trail to more expert or authoritative websites, and students can likewise find useful primary sources through Wikipedia.

But teacher, journalists and other professional researchers offer this advice: Don't rely exclusively on Wikipedia for crucial information used to make a health decision, write a story for publication, or to pad that next midterm paper.

Review: Encyclopedia Software 

http://www.livescience.com/technology/091106-ttr-wikipedia.html



本文於 修改第 3 次
回應 回應給此人 推薦文章 列印 加入我的文摘

引用
引用網址:https://city.udn.com/forum/trackback.jsp?no=2976&aid=3690231
 回應文章
維基百科的10大爭議性議題 - The Physics arXiv Blog
推薦1


胡卜凱
等級:8
留言加入好友

 
文章推薦人 (1)

胡卜凱

Edit Wars Reveal The 10 Most Controversial Topics on Wikipedia

 

An analysis of the most highly contested articles on Wikipedia reveals the controversies that appear invariant across languages and cultures

 

The Physics arXiv Blog, 07/17/13

 

Wikipedia, the encyclopaedia that anybody can edit, is one of the more extraordinary collective efforts of the crowd. Wikipedia’s own estimate is that it has some 77,000 contributors working on more than 22 million articles in 285 languages. The largest edition, the English version, alone offers over 4 million articles.

 

So it’s not surprising that disputes arise over the wording of these articles. Indeed, the controversy can sometimes reach war-like proportions with one editor changing the wording and another immediately changing it back again.

 

These so-called edit wars can be used to identify controversial topics but an interesting question is how controversy varies across languages and cultures. Given its unique position that straddles multiple languages and cultures, Wikipedia is in the perfect position to provide some answers.

 

Today, Taha Yasseri at the University of Oxford in the UK and a few pals have ranked the most controversial topics in 10 different languages according to the intensity of the editing wars they generate.

 

The result is a fascinating insight into the way conflicts emerge in different languages and how they are resolved. Yasseri and co also reveal the controversies that are common across language groups and how they vary around the world.

 

These guys begin by defining what they mean by a controversy. In Wikipedia, the editorial history of every article is easily accessible but the number of changes is by no means a measure of controversy; it may simply indicate a rapidly changing topic.

 

Instead, Yasseri and co focus on “reverts”, edits in which one author completely undoes changes made by another and so returns the article to an earlier version. Reverts are relatively common in Wikipedia and may not necessarily be indicative of controversy.

 

So Yasseri and co looked instead for “mutual reverts” in which one editor reverts another’s work and vice versa, so both editors are undoing each other’s changes.

 

That leads to a relatively straightforward definition of controversiality:

 

The controversiality of an article is defined by summing the weights of all mutually reverting editor pairs, excluding the topmost pair, and multiplying this number by the total number of editors involved in the article,”

 

say Yasseri and co.

 

They then went through each language version of Wikipedia searching for mutual reverts and calculating the controversiality of the stories these reverts are associated with.

 

That gives a simple list of the most controversial articles in each language. In English, the top 10 most controversial articles are as follows:

 

1.       George W Bush

2.       Anarchism

3.       Muhammad

4.       List of World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. employees

5.       Global Warming

6.       Circumcision

7.       United States

8.       Jesus

9.       Race and intelligence

10.   Christianity

 

But it is also possible to group the languages into three sets

 

1) English, German, French, Spanish;

2) Czech, Hungarian, Romanian;

3) Arabic, Persian, Hebrew.

 

Yasseri and co then compared the lists from each group to see which topics overlapped.

 

They say that, in general, major religions and religious figures as well as articles related to anti-Semitism and Israel are highly contested in many languages. In particular: “The articles Israel, Adolf Hitler, The Holocaust and God are highly contested in all the three language sets,” they report.

 

However, while there are a small number of topics that seem to be controversial in most languages, most of the controversial articles are language dependent. So they may be controversial in one language but not another, the Islas Malvinas/Falkland islands article in the Spanish Wikipedia, for example.

 

That’s an interesting insight into the topics that different language communities consider worth fighting about.

 

Yasseri and co have plans for the future. They say their measure of controversiality clearly varies with time as the nature of the topic and the editors working on it changes. So they plan to study this dynamic aspect to see how the patterns of controversy change over time. It’ll be interesting to see what emerges.

 

Ref: arxiv.org/abs/1305.5566:The Most Controversial Topics In Wikipedia: A Multilingual And Geographical Analysis

 

http://www.technologyreview.com/view/517101/edit-wars-reveal-the-10-most-controversial-topics-on-wikipedia/



本文於 修改第 1 次
回應 回應給此人 推薦文章 列印 加入我的文摘
引用網址:https://city.udn.com/forum/trackback.jsp?no=2976&aid=4988950