Hi Everyone,
The next Wikimedia Research Showcase will be live-streamed Wednesday,
September 19 2018 at 11:30 AM (PDT) 18:30 UTC.
YouTube stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OY8vZ6wES9o
As usual, you can join the conversation on IRC at #wikimedia-research. And,
you can watch our past research showcases here.
<https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research/Showcase#Upcoming_Showcase>
Hope to see you there!
This month's presentations is:
The impact of news exposure on collective attention in the United States
during the 2016 Zika epidemicBy *Michele Tizzoni, André Panisson, Daniela
Paolotti, Ciro Cattuto*In recent years, many studies have drawn attention
to the important role of collective awareness and human behaviour during
epidemic outbreaks. A number of modelling efforts have investigated the
interaction between the disease transmission dynamics and human behaviour
change mediated by news coverage and by information spreading in the
population. Yet, given the scarcity of data on public awareness during an
epidemic, few studies have relied on empirical data. Here, we use
fine-grained, geo-referenced data from three online sources - Wikipedia,
the GDELT Project and the Internet Archive - to quantify population-scale
information seeking about the 2016 Zika virus epidemic in the U.S.,
explicitly linking such behavioural signal to epidemiological data.
Geo-localized Wikipedia pageview data reveal that visiting patterns of
Zika-related pages in Wikipedia were highly synchronized across the United
States and largely explained by exposure to national television broadcast.
Contrary to the assumption of some theoretical models, news volume and
Wikipedia visiting patterns were not significantly correlated with the
magnitude or the extent of the epidemic. Attention to Zika, in terms of
Zika-related Wikipedia pageviews, was high at the beginning of the
outbreak, when public health agencies raised an international alert and
triggered media coverage, but subsequently exhibited an activity profile
that suggests nonlinear dependencies and memory effects in the relationship
between information seeking, media pressure, and disease dynamics. This
calls for a new and more general modelling framework to describe the
interaction between media exposure, public awareness, and disease dynamics
during epidemic outbreaks.
Deliberation and resolution on WikipediaA case study of requests for
commentsBy *Amy Zhang, Jane Im*Resolving disputes in a timely manner is
crucial for any online production group. We present an analysis of Requests
for Comments (RfCs), one of the main vehicles on Wikipedia for formally
resolving a policy or content dispute. We collected an exhaustive dataset
of 7,316 RfCs on English Wikipedia over the course of 7 years and conducted
a qualitative and quantitative analysis into what issues affect the RfC
process. Our analysis was informed by 10 interviews with frequent RfC
closers. We found that a major issue affecting the RfC process is the
prevalence of RfCs that could have benefited from formal closure but that
linger indefinitely without one, with factors including participants'
interest and expertise impacting the likelihood of resolution. From these
findings, we developed a model that predicts whether
--
Sarah R. Rodlund
Technical Writer, Developer Advocacy
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Developer_Advocacy>
srodlund(a)wikimedia.org
From: Sydney Poore <spoore(a)wikimedia.org>
To: Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com>
Cc: wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Bcc:
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 16:20:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Research about discretionary sanctions on ENWP
Hello Pine,
You might want to record it in the IdeaLab to make sure that it considered
for future reference when people are discussing ideas for research.
Sydney
On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 4:01 PM Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello colleagues,
>
> There is currently a small amount of discussion happening on an ENWP
> arbitration page
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_…>
> regarding what ENWP calls "discretionary sanctions
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Discretionary…>"
> practices. Does anyone know of research regarding the effects, good and
> bad, of the Arbcom authorization of discretionary sanctions? If not, then I
> suggest that this be a topic of future research, particularly for
> researchers involved with WMF's work on community health.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>
--
Sydney Poore
Trust and Safety Specialist
Wikimedia Foundation
Trust and Safety team;
Anti-harassment tools team
--
Sydney Poore
Trust and Safety Specialist
Wikimedia Foundation
Trust and Safety team;
Anti-harassment tools team
Some time in the last few months (possibly at Wikimania) someone pointed me
at some research about predicting the outcome of Wikipedia consensus
building from the language they were using in Talk. I think it was either
research in progress or recently completed.
As I recall, the main "take home" message was that discussions where "you"
started to be used tended to end up in conflict and that discussions that
avoided "you" were more likely to resolve amicably.
If this rings any bells for you, can you please point me at it please.
Thanks
Kerry
From: Sydney Poore <spoore(a)wikimedia.org>
To: Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com>
Cc: wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Bcc:
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2018 10:25:39 -0400
Subject: Re: [Wiki-research-l] Results from 2018 global Wikimedia survey
are published!
Hello Pine,
Thanks for asking. I always will take the opportunity when given the chance
to talk about the work that the Community health initiative, Trust &
Safety, Legal, Research, Anti-Harassment Tools teams are doing around
community health. :-)
The work on Community health done by these teams is reflected in the
Foundation's Annual Plan. Much of the work on community health is mentioned
in the Community health CDP.1
But because community health is a large topic, other teams across the
Foundation collaborate with these teams and also do work themselves
directly or indirectly addressing community health. The CE Insights survey
is a good example of that! Also, recently there was an Inspire Campaign
about how to measure community health
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Inspire> run by Community
Resources team. 2
Speaking more directly to your comments, the Community health initiative
has identified areas of focus that are related to the topics you mention.
For example, early this fiscal year, a main focus is "Contributors and
administrators are equipped with tools to make timely, informed decisions
when harassment occurs." This builds on the work Antti-Harassment tools
team began last year on the User Interaction Timeline tool and changes to
Special:Block that add the ability for admins to do Partial blocks instead
of site wide blocks.
There is an on going discussion
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_health_initiative/Per-user_p…>with
the community about how to design the new functionality into the tool.
Currently this is a discussion about the best method to log partial blocks
and the third set of designs are available for community feedback.3 Within
the next week a discussion is going to start on Meta about how to measure
the effectiveness of blocks. This will involve be both a long term and
short term research projects with potentially many opportunities for
collaboration. Look for upcoming announcements for more information.
Another focus early this year is working with the community to develop a
Community Health Metrics kit that will allow communities to measure
quantitative data and satisfaction levels over time, and identify areas for
improvement. There is a consultation starting today
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_health_initiative/Metrics_kit>.4 Joe
Sutherland is the lead on the project and will be making the announcements.
We welcome comments and questions here, on wiki, and by private email about
the work that is underway or in planning.
Warm regards,
Sydney
1
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_health_initiative/Annual_plan_FY1…
2 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Inspire
3
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_health_initiative/Per-user_p…
4 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_health_initiative/Metrics_kit
On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 2:25 PM Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Edward, I'm surprised that this thread only appears in my email under
> Research-l, but I can see in the WMF mail archives that you sent the email
> to other lists also. I wonder if that happened because you used bcc. Maybe
> there is a bug in Gmail. On the topic of diversity research, thanks for the
> link to the team reports. I'll put those on my list of things that would be
> good to browse.
>
> Regarding the topic of harassment that the person with the email
> "80hnhtv4agou" raised, I think that it's good to ask what more could and
> should be done. My view is that WMF shouldn't be directly intervening in
> community activities, but WMF support for community self-governance is
> welcome with actions such as developing better moderation tools and
> providing financial support to affiliates and community members who want to
> develop evidence-based training modules. Sydney Poore is on the
> Anti-Harrassment Tools team and I'm pinging her here to invite her to add
> any comments that she has.
>
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 5:45 PM Edward Galvez <egalvez(a)wikimedia.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for your note Pine. I believe I have already shared this on
>> Wikimedia-l; I haven't shared to Announce, so I can do that.
>>
>> "Diversity" is multifaceted. I think that some areas offer some hope (e.g.
>> program organizers & affiliate organizers have higher proportion of women
>> and geographic representation), others I am not uncertain whether we put a
>> lot of attention (Education & Age), and in others we are seeing little
>> progress (gender on the projects). And perhaps some aren't even on our
>> radar. I think many teams are still working to understand what are the
>> problems and possible levers that can help us to bring change to these
>> measures. Some of those teams include Contributors/Audiences team,
>> Anti-Harassment Tools, Trust & Safety and Community Resources. Each of
>> these teams bringing their own strengths and angles to the problem. I
>> invite you to read the team reports
>> <
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Engagement_Insights/2018_Report/T…
>> >
>> .
>>
>> The research team is also working on finding a way to capture demographic
>> data as well this year. While we gather this data through CE Insights it
>> is
>> not the most optimal way to measure demographic data. There was also the
>> recent email by Erik Zachte about language diversity (Email subject:
>> "Wikipedias, participation per language") Always to good to start to
>> measure what you want to change.
>>
>> I also invite you (and perhaps everyone on this list) to reflect on: what
>> numbers are most concerning for you related to diversity? What could you
>> do
>> to improve diversity on the projects? And decide how you would like to
>> take
>> action.
>>
>> Hope this helps!
>> Edward
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 8:53 PM Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Edward,
>> >
>> > Thanks for this publication. This research is likely to be of interest
>> to
>> > the WikimediaAnnounce-l (and by extension, Wikimedia-l) and Wikitech-l
>> > subscribers, so I suggest that you cross-post this publication to those
>> > lists.
>> >
>> > After reading this report, I have a question which may be challenging to
>> > answer: what should we do to improve our diversity? Many of us, inside
>> and
>> > outside of WMF, have wanted to see progress on diversity metrics for
>> years,
>> > and I get the impression that while significant attention and resources
>> are
>> > being given to diversity, our progress has been disappointing. Perhaps
>> > that's a subject that can be discussed further during the video
>> > presentation, but I'd also be interested in hearing your comments here
>> on
>> > Research-l.
>> >
>> > Have a good weekend,
>> >
>> > Pine
>> > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 11:07 PM Edward Galvez <egalvez(a)wikimedia.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi everyone,
>> > >
>> > > I'm excited to share that our annual survey about Wikimedia
>> communities
>> > is
>> > > now published!
>> > >
>> > > This survey included 170 questions and reaches over 4,000 community
>> > > members across
>> > > four audiences: Contributors, Affiliate organizers, Program
>> Organizers,
>> > and
>> > > Volunteer Developers. This survey helps us hear from the experience of
>> > > Wikimedians from across the movement so that teams are able to use
>> > > community feedback in their planning and their work. This survey also
>> > helps
>> > > us learn about long term changes in communities, such as community
>> health
>> > > or demographics.
>> > >
>> > > The report is available on meta:
>> > >
>> >
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Engagement_Insights/2018_Report
>> > >
>> > > For this survey, we worked with 11 teams to develop the questions.
>> Once
>> > the
>> > > results were analyzed, we spent time with each team to help them
>> > understand
>> > > their results. Most teams have already identified how they will use
>> the
>> > > results to help improve their work to support you.
>> > >
>> > > The report could be useful for your work in the Wikimedia movement as
>> > well!
>> > > What are you learning from the data? Take some time to read the report
>> > and
>> > > share your feedback on the talk pages. We have also published a blog
>> that
>> > > you can read.[1]
>> > >
>> > > We are hosting a livestream presentation[2] on September 20 at 1600
>> UTC.
>> > > Hope to see you there!
>> > >
>> > > Feel free to email me directly with any questions.
>> > >
>> > > All the best,
>> > > Edward
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > [1]
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://wikimediafoundation.org/2018/09/13/what-we-learned-surveying-4000-c…
>> > > [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGQtWFP9Cjc
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Edward Galvez
>> > > Evaluation Strategist, Surveys
>> > > Learning & Evaluation
>> > > Community Engagement
>> > > Wikimedia Foundation
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Edward Galvez
>> > > Evaluation Strategist, Surveys
>> > > Learning & Evaluation
>> > > Community Engagement
>> > > Wikimedia Foundation
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > Wiki-research-l mailing list
>> > > Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>> > >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Wiki-research-l mailing list
>> > Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Edward Galvez
>> Evaluation Strategist, Surveys
>> Learning & Evaluation
>> Community Engagement
>> Wikimedia Foundation
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wiki-research-l mailing list
>> Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>>
>
--
Sydney Poore
Trust and Safety Specialist
Wikimedia Foundation
Trust and Safety team;
Anti-harassment tools team
--
Sydney Poore
Trust and Safety Specialist
Wikimedia Foundation
Trust and Safety team;
Anti-harassment tools team
I apologize for my continued confusion about what was written on which
mailing list. I can mostly blame Gmail for not handling the bcc's like I
think that it should. I referred to an email from 80hnhtv4agou in my
previous post to Research-l, but that person sent their email to
Wikitech-l. I am forwarding 80hnhtv4agou's email (below) to Research-l, and
I invited 80hnhtv4agou to participate here.
Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: 80hnhtv4agou--- via Wikitech-l <wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Date: Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 1:34 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Results from 2018 global Wikimedia survey
arepublished!
To: Wikimedia developers <wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>, <
egalvez(a)wikimedia.org>
Experience of harassment has
not declined since 2017 and appears to remain steady
At
what point and time does the foundation step in, as some language
editions do and stop the warring and abuse by users and administrators
?
does
the board know what is going on here ?
and
it is not just EN wikipedia, but in all l anguage editions as well.
Hi everybody,
on Thursday Sept 13th (EU morning) I am planning to reboot the stat hosts
(stat1004, stat1005 and stat1006) and the notebook hosts (notebook1003,
notebook1004) for Linux kernel upgrades. Please let me know if this impacts
your work in https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T203165 or on IRC (elukey -
#wikimedia-analytics).
Thanks!
Luca
Cross-posting to Research-l. Thank you Leila.
Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Leila Zia <leila(a)wikimedia.org>
Date: Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 12:43 AM
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why We Read Wikipedia in your language
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Hi all,
Update time.
Thank you all for your patience and support as we went through the
different stages of the analysis for this study. We have now concluded
the study based on the survey of the 14 Wikipedia languages [1]. Here
is what will happen next:
* We are doing some relatively major documentation at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Characterizing_Wikipedia_Reader_Be…
. The goal is to have that page and the sub-pages in a way that can be
consumed more easily by audiences beyond researchers. I expect the
pages to come to life almost completely on or before 2018-09-14. We
will need the first couple of weeks of October for data and code
documentation to make sure you have all the data you need for your
languages to dig deeper if you choose to. By the end of October,
please expect all documentation to be completed.
* We are happy to try to give presentations about this research to
your language community if there is interest on your end and we can
make it work on our end. The priority will be given to languages that
already participated in the study. If you want to sign up for one,
please go to
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Characterizing_Wikipedia_Reader_Be…
* Our November Research Showcase [2] will most likely be on this
topic, so if you want to have a general overview of the results, keep
an eye on that.
* We have submitted a research paper to a peer-reviewed conference
based on this work. There is an anonymization process for the reviews
and in order to not break that we will wait until the results are out
(towards the end of October) and only then put the full paper on
arxiv, under CC BY-SA 4.0 or a more permissive license.
* We are discussing with our collaborators to potentially set up a
challenge for researchers to work with a subset of the data
(anonymized/aggregated/...) to answer an interesting research
questions. If you want to brainstorm with us about this, please drop a
line at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research_talk:Characterizing_Wikipedia_Read…
* Do you have an idea about how to more effectively disseminate this
knowledge? please call it out. There is quite a bit of knowledge to
share and we're honestly not 100% sure what the best way to do it is
across a global movement. As a result, we're offering a mix of
documentation, pinging points of contacts in each language so they're
aware of them, general presentations, language specific presentations,
as well as data documentation for you to be able to dig on your own
deeper.
Best,
Leila, on behalf of the researchers (Florian Lemmerich, Diego Saez,
Bob West, and myself)
[1] ar, bn, de, en, es, he, hi, hu, ja, nl, ro, ru, uk, zh
[2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research/Showcase
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Hi. I'm writing to this mailing list because it is listed in the side bar
of the wikipapers site.
Yesterday I created an account in wikipapers
<http://wikipapers.referata.com/> and I am trying to upload an image to
wikipapers, but when I try to upload a 10K
B file I get this error:
<You cannot upload this file, because you are currently using 110.26953125
MB of file space, and uploading it would exceed the allowed quota for your
site (100 MB).>
in fact it happens with any file, because even a 152 bytes files gives me
this error.
I haven't uploaded any file yet so I don't understand that error :S
--
Saludos,
Abel.