Hi Kerry,
There have been several nationalistic and or religious disputes that have
involved the same protagonists over numerous articles on that contentious
topic. Pretty much any topic that is controversial in real life will be
controversial on Wikipedia, with the added possibility that the Internet is
a wonderful device for putting people into contact with people from very
different cultures and with viewpoints that might not exist in their real
life society/culture/country
One good list of things that have been controversial on Wikipedia is the
list of general sanctions decreed by ARBCOM
TTFN
WereSpielChequers
On 25 June 2012 08:26, Kerry Raymond <kerry.raymond(a)gmail.com> wrote:
** ** ** ** **
Thank you for sharing your paper. I found it very interesting that there
are good metrics that enable detection of articles with conflict. I have a
couple of questions, which might well go beyond your current study but I’d
welcome your thoughts.****
** **
My first question is whether or not you think this metric or some variant
can be used to detect current conflict in articles (rather than the
existence of past conflict). My thinking is that if conflict can be
detected early, it may be possible for the peacemakers to guide the
conflict to a consensus rather than attempt to do so once hostilities are
well-established.****
** **
Another question relates to warring editors. If I read it right, you
looked for pairs (or groups) of editors that were reverting one another’s
changes (i.e. an edit war) in an article. However, is conflict limited to
just one article? Is it possible that warring editors on one article may
then engage in conflicts over other articles simultaneously or later,
either because of the same issue that caused the earlier disagreements or
because they had developed a dislike for one another and were ready to find
excuses to be unpleasant to each other. That is, are we just looking at
articles that are controversial (in some way) or are we also looking at
pairs (or groups) of editors who are actively hostile to one another. It
might be interesting to know if editors who have been involved in edit wars
go on to peacefully co-exist with one another on other articles, go to war
with them over other articles, or simply never happen to encounter each
other again (WP being a big place). If they do go on to war again, was it
because they are both active on articles within similar categories (e.g.
sexuality) or because one/both is stalking the other (which you might
suspect if they had conflicts across a range of topics, especially where
one of them had no prior edit history in that category (e.g. start warring
over Ben Franklin and then continue it in Pumpkin).****
** **
Kerry****
** **
** **
** **
** **
** **
------------------------------
*From:* wiki-research-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:
wiki-research-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org] *On Behalf Of *Taha Yasseri
*Sent:* Friday, 22 June 2012 8:15 AM
*To:* Research into Wikimedia content and communities
*Subject:* [Wiki-research-l] Dynamics of Conflicts in Wikipedia****
** **
Dear Wikipedia researchers!
Our manuscript on is now released by PLoS ONE and available at:
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0038869
I would delightedly take your comments and remarks.
bests
.Taha
Dr. Taha Yasseri.
---------------------------------------------
www.phy.bme.hu/~yasseri <http://www.phy.bme.hu/%7Eyasseri>
Department of Theoretical Physics
****Institute** of **Physics****
****Budapest** **University**** of Technology and Economics
Budafoki út 8.
H-1111 ****Budapest**, **Hungary****
tel: +36 1 463 4110
fax: +36 1 463 3567
---------------------------------------------
--
Taha.****
_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l