Hoi, There was a recent blogpost where a company used Wikidata to combine data from multiple sources to provide information to people listening to music. I know it is not Wikipedia but Wikipedia information is provided as a result. Thanks, GerardM
On 26 July 2017 at 09:23, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
Is there any other research studying whether editing wikipedia(s) produces real-world changes?
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com Date: Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 6:10 PM Subject: Re: research trying to influence real-world outcomes by editing Wikipedia To: "wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org" <wiki-research-l@lists. wikimedia.org>
A followup by the same authors reviewed in today's Signpost reverses their opinion on causality, asserting that I improvements to articles about places increases tourism:
http://marit.hinnosaar.net/wikipediamatters.pdf
On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 3:52 PM, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
This was in the recent Research Newsletter:
https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/127472/1/847290360.pdf
They found a correlation between the length of articles about tourist destinations and the number of tourists visiting them. They tried to influence other destinations by adding content and did not find a correlation in the subsequent number of tourists, suggesting that the causation flows from tourism to article length instead.
But I was taken aback by the last line of their paper, "using the suggested research design to study other areas of information acquisition, such as medicine or school choices could be fruitful directions."
Are there any ethical guidelines concerning whether this is reasonable? Should there be?
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l