The Wikipedia Diversity Observatory: helping communities to bridge content gaps through interactive interfaces

Miquel-Ribé, Marc; Laniado, David

doi:10.1186/s13174-021-00141-y

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Given that the bibliography of life is of little use unless it has content, I have focussed here on where that content comes from, and to what extent the Wikidata community contributes to the curation and improvement of that content. There is considerable scope for analysing gaps and biases in coverage in geography and language ( Miquel-Ribé & Laniado, 2021 ) as well as taxonomy ( Grieneisen et al, 2014 ; Troudet et al, 2017 ). Wikidata’s user interface is aimed at data entry and editing rather than search and visualisation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wikidata and the bibliography of life

Page¹

2022

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biological taxonomy rests on a long tail of publications spanning nearly three centuries. Not only is this literature vital to resolving disputes about taxonomy and nomenclature, for many species it represents a key source—indeed sometimes the only source—of information about that species. Unlike other disciplines such as biomedicine, the taxonomic community lacks a centralised, curated literature database (the “bibliography of life”). This article argues that Wikidata can be that database as it has flexible and sophisticated models of bibliographic information, and an active community of people and programs (“bots”) adding, editing, and curating that information.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wikidata and the bibliography of life

Page¹

2022

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For this reason, we decided to follow an open research model approach for this project, given that it is the most convenient way to engage with Wikimedia communities. This implies sharing the results, the prototypes work-in-progress, as well as the code and data at all times, presenting preliminary work at community gatherings, and discussing the work with relevant members from communities in order to get iterative feedback [13]. This is completely in line with the Wikimedia movement ethos, which encourages being bold and improving on things incrementally.…”

Section: Research Processmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…To date, there is no comprehensive study on community growth and sustainability aimed at understanding the Wikipedia communities accounting for their linguistic diversity. Visual tools have been developed for exposing different aspects of social interactions in Wikipedia, including edit histories [10], controversies [11], language gap [12], cultural diversity [13]; however, we find a lack of tools to describe the state and health of a community, beyond the basic statistics available on the Wikimedia servers (Wikimedia Statistics, https://stats.wikimedia.org/ [accessed 24 March 2022]. ), and tools dedicated to monitoring participation to specific events (Event Metrics, https://eventmetrics.wmflabs.org/ [accessed 24 March 2022].)…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Community Vital Signs: Measuring Wikipedia Communities’ Sustainable Growth and Renewal

2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wikipedia is an undeniably successful project, with unprecedented numbers of online volunteer contributors. After 2007, researchers started to observe that the number of active editors for the largest Wikipedias declined after rapid initial growth. Years after those announcements, researchers and community activists still need to understand how to measure community health. In this paper, we study patterns of growth, decline and stagnation, and we propose the creation of 6 sets of language-independent indicators that we call “Vital Signs”. Three focus on the general population of active editors creating content: retention, stability, and balance; the other three are related to specific community functions: specialists, administrators, and global community participation. We borrow the analogy from the medical field, as these indicators represent a first step in defining the health status of a community; they can constitute a valuable reference point to foresee and prevent future risks. We present our analysis for eight Wikipedia language editions, and we show that communities are renewing their productive force even with stagnating absolute numbers; we observe a general lack of renewal in positions related to special functions or administratorship. Finally, we evaluate our framework by discussing these indicators with Wikimedia affiliates to support them in promoting the necessary changes to grow the communities.

show abstract

“…Regarding the gender gap in content, research reveals that women are underrepresented among the main figures in all language editions of Wikipedia (Miquel-Ribe and Laniado, 2021). Articles for deletion is a possibility within the decision-making process in Wikipedia article editing.…”

Section: Gender Gap In Wikipediamentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing knowledge organization systems from a gender perspective: Wikipedia taxonomy and Wikidata ontologies

Centelles,

Ferran-Ferrer

2024

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeDevelop a comprehensive framework for assessing the knowledge organization systems (KOSs), including the taxonomy of Wikipedia and the ontologies of Wikidata, with a specific focus on enhancing management and retrieval with a gender nonbinary perspective.Design/methodology/approachThis study employs heuristic and inspection methods to assess Wikipedia’s KOS, ensuring compliance with international standards. It evaluates the efficiency of retrieving non-masculine gender-related articles using the Catalan Wikipedian category scheme, identifying limitations. Additionally, a novel assessment of Wikidata ontologies examines their structure and coverage of gender-related properties, comparing them to Wikipedia’s taxonomy for advantages and enhancements.FindingsThis study evaluates Wikipedia’s taxonomy and Wikidata’s ontologies, establishing evaluation criteria for gender-based categorization and exploring their structural effectiveness. The evaluation process suggests that Wikidata ontologies may offer a viable solution to address Wikipedia’s categorization challenges.Originality/valueThe assessment of Wikipedia categories (taxonomy) based on KOS standards leads to the conclusion that there is ample room for improvement, not only in matters concerning gender identity but also in the overall KOS to enhance search and retrieval for users. These findings bear relevance for the design of tools to support information retrieval on knowledge-rich websites, as they assist users in exploring topics and concepts.

show abstract

The Wikipedia Diversity Observatory: helping communities to bridge content gaps through interactive interfaces

Cited by 7 publications

References 37 publications

Wikidata and the bibliography of life

Wikidata and the bibliography of life

Community Vital Signs: Measuring Wikipedia Communities’ Sustainable Growth and Renewal

Assessing knowledge organization systems from a gender perspective: Wikipedia taxonomy and Wikidata ontologies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About