This paper (first reference) is the result of a class project I was part of
almost two years ago for CSCI 5417 Information Retrieval Systems. It builds
on a class project I did in CSCI 5832 Natural Language Processing and which
I presented at Wikimania '07. The project was very late as we didn't send
the final paper in until the day before new years. This technical report was
never really announced that I recall so I thought it would be interesting to
look briefly at the results. The goal of this paper was to break articles
down into surface features and latent features and then use those to study
the rating system being used, predict article quality and rank results in a
search engine. We used the [[random forests]] classifier which allowed us to
analyze the contribution of each feature to performance by looking directly
at the weights that were assigned. While the surface analysis was performed
on the whole english wikipedia, the latent analysis was performed on the
simple english wikipedia (it is more expensive to compute). = Surface
features = * Readability measures are the single best predictor of quality
that I have found, as defined by the Wikipedia Editorial Team (WET). The
[[Automated Readability Index]], [[Gunning Fog Index]] and [[Flesch-Kincaid
Grade Level]] were the strongest predictors, followed by length of article
html, number of paragraphs, [[Flesh Reading Ease]], [[Smog Grading]], number
of internal links, [[Laesbarhedsindex Readability Formula]], number of words
and number of references. Weakly predictive were number of to be's, number
of sentences, [[Coleman-Liau Index]], number of templates, PageRank, number
of external links, number of relative links. Not predictive (overall - see
the end of section 2 for the per-rating score breakdown): Number of h2 or
h3's, number of conjunctions, number of images*, average word length, number
of h4's, number of prepositions, number of pronouns, number of interlanguage
links, average syllables per word, number of nominalizations, article age
(based on page id), proportion of questions, average sentence length. :*
Number of images was actually by far the single strongest predictor of any
class, but only for Featured articles. Because it was so good at picking out
featured articles and somewhat good at picking out A and G articles the
classifier was confused in so many cases that the overall contribution of
this feature to classification performance is zero. :* Number of external
links is strongly predictive of Featured articles. :* The B class is highly
distinctive. It has a strong "signature," with high predictive value
assigned to many features. The Featured class is also very distinctive. F, B
and S (Stop/Stub) contain the most information.
:* A is the least distinct class, not being very different from F or G. =
Latent features = The algorithm used for latent analysis, which is an
analysis of the occurence of words in every document with respect to the
link structure of the encyclopedia ("concepts"), is [[Latent Dirichlet
Allocation]]. This part of the analysis was done by CS PhD student Praful
Mangalath. An example of what can be done with the result of this analysis
is that you provide a word (a search query) such as "hippie". You can then
look at the weight of every article for the word hippie. You can pick the
article with the largest weight, and then look at its link network. You can
pick out the articles that this article links to and/or which link to this
article that are also weighted strongly for the word hippie, while also
contributing maximally to this articles "hippieness". We tried this query in
our system (LDA), Google (site:en.wikipedia.org hippie), and the Simple
English Wikipedia's Lucene search engine. The breakdown of articles occuring
in the top ten search results for this word for those engines is: * LDA
only: [[Acid rock]], [[Aldeburgh Festival]], [[Anne Murray]], [[Carl
Radle]], [[Harry Nilsson]], [[Jack Kerouac]], [[Phil Spector]], [[Plastic
Ono Band]], [[Rock and Roll]], [[Salvador Allende]], [[Smothers brothers]],
[[Stanley Kubrick]]. * Google only: [[Glam Rock]], [[South Park]]. * Simple
only: [[African Americans]], [[Charles Manson]], [[Counterculture]], [[Drug
use]], [[Flower Power]], [[Nuclear weapons]], [[Phish]], [[Sexual
liberation]], [[Summer of Love]] * LDA & Google & Simple: [[Hippie]],
[[Human Be-in]], [[Students for a democratic society]], [[Woodstock
festival]] * LDA & Google: [[Psychedelic Pop]] * Google & Simple: [[Lysergic
acid diethylamide]], [[Summer of Love]] ( See the paper for the articles
produced for the keywords philosophy and economics ) = Discussion /
Conclusion = * The results of the latent analysis are totally up to your
perception. But what is interesting is that the LDA features predict the WET
ratings of quality just as well as the surface level features. Both feature
sets (surface and latent) both pull out all almost of the information that
the rating system bears. * The rating system devised by the WET is not
distinctive. You can best tell the difference between, grouped together,
Featured, A and Good articles vs B articles. Featured, A and Good articles
are also quite distinctive (Figure 1). Note that in this study we didn't
look at Start's and Stubs, but in earlier paper we did. :* This is
interesting when compared to this recent entry on the YouTube blog. "Five
Stars Dominate Ratings"
http://youtube-global.blogspot.com/2009/09/five-stars-dominate-ratings.html…
I think a sane, well researched (with actual subjects) rating system
is
well within the purview of the Usability Initiative. Helping people find and
create good content is what Wikipedia is all about. Having a solid rating
system allows you to reorganized the user interface, the Wikipedia
namespace, and the main namespace around good content and bad content as
needed. If you don't have a solid, information bearing rating system you
don't know what good content really is (really bad content is easy to spot).
:* My Wikimania talk was all about gathering data from people about articles
and using that to train machines to automatically pick out good content. You
ask people questions along dimensions that make sense to people, and give
the machine access to other surface features (such as a statistical measure
of readability, or length) and latent features (such as can be derived from
document word occurence and encyclopedia link structure). I referenced page
262 of Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance to give an example of the
kind of qualitative features I would ask people. It really depends on what
features end up bearing information, to be tested in "the lab". Each word is
an example dimension of quality: We have "*unity, vividness, authority,
economy, sensitivity, clarity, emphasis, flow, suspense, brilliance,
precision, proportion, depth and so on.*" You then use surface and latent
features to predict these values for all articles. You can also say, when a
person rates this article as high on the x scale, they also mean that it has
has this much of these surface and these latent features.
= References =
- DeHoust, C., Mangalath, P., Mingus., B. (2008). *Improving search in
Wikipedia through quality and concept discovery*. Technical Report.
PDF<http://grey.colorado.edu/mediawiki/sites/mingus/images/6/68/DeHoustMangalat…>
- Rassbach, L., Mingus., B, Blackford, T. (2007). *Exploring the
feasibility of automatically rating online article quality*. Technical
Report. PDF<http://grey.colorado.edu/mediawiki/sites/mingus/images/d/d3/RassbachPincock…>
Hoi,
I have asked and received permission to forward to you all this most
excellent bit of news.
The linguist list, is a most excellent resource for people interested in the
field of linguistics. As I mentioned some time ago they have had a funding
drive and in that funding drive they asked for a certain amount of money in
a given amount of days and they would then have a project on Wikipedia to
learn what needs doing to get better coverage for the field of linguistics.
What you will read in this mail that the total community of linguists are
asked to cooperate. I am really thrilled as it will also get us more
linguists interested in what we do. My hope is that a fraction will be
interested in the languages that they care for and help it become more
relevant. As a member of the "language prevention committee", I love to get
more knowledgeable people involved in our smaller projects. If it means that
we get more requests for more projects we will really feel embarrassed with
all the new projects we will have to approve because of the quality of the
Incubator content and the quality of the linguistic arguments why we should
approve yet another language :)
NB Is this not a really clever way of raising money; give us this much in
this time frame and we will then do this as a bonus...
Thanks,
GerardM
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: LINGUIST Network <linguist(a)linguistlist.org>
Date: Jun 18, 2007 6:53 PM
Subject: 18.1831, All: Call for Participation: Wikipedia Volunteers
To: LINGUIST(a)listserv.linguistlist.org
LINGUIST List: Vol-18-1831. Mon Jun 18 2007. ISSN: 1068 - 4875.
Subject: 18.1831, All: Call for Participation: Wikipedia Volunteers
Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Eastern Michigan U <aristar(a)linguistlist.org>
Helen Aristar-Dry, Eastern Michigan U <hdry(a)linguistlist.org>
Reviews: Laura Welcher, Rosetta Project
<reviews(a)linguistlist.org>
Homepage: http://linguistlist.org/
The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University,
and donations from subscribers and publishers.
Editor for this issue: Ann Sawyer <sawyer(a)linguistlist.org>
================================================================
To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at
http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html
===========================Directory==============================
1)
Date: 18-Jun-2007
From: Hannah Morales < hannah(a)linguistlist.org >
Subject: Wikipedia Volunteers
-------------------------Message 1 ----------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 12:49:35
From: Hannah Morales < hannah(a)linguistlist.org >
Subject: Wikipedia Volunteers
Dear subscribers,
As you may recall, one of our Fund Drive 2007 campaigns was called the
"Wikipedia Update Vote." We asked our viewers to consider earmarking their
donations to organize an update project on linguistics entries in the
English-language Wikipedia. You can find more background information on this
at:
http://linguistlist.org/donation/fund-drive2007/wikipedia/index.cfm.
The speed with which we met our goal, thanks to the interest and generosity
of
our readers, was a sure sign that the linguistics community was enthusiastic
about the idea. Now that summer is upon us, and some of you may have a bit
more
leisure time, we are hoping that you will be able to help us get started on
the
Wikipedia project. The LINGUIST List's role in this project is a purely
organizational one. We will:
*Help, with your input, to identify major gaps in the Wikipedia materials or
pages that need improvement;
*Compile a list of linguistics pages that Wikipedia editors have identified
as
"in need of attention from an expert on the subject" or " does not cite any
references or sources," etc;
*Send out periodical calls for volunteer contributors on specific topics or
articles;
*Provide simple instructions on how to upload your entries into Wikipedia;
*Keep track of our project Wikipedians;
*Keep track of revisions and new entries;
*Work with Wikimedia Foundation to publicize the linguistics community's
efforts.
We hope you are as enthusiastic about this effort as we are. Just to help us
all
get started looking at Wikipedia more critically, and to easily identify an
area
needing improvement, we suggest that you take a look at the List of
Linguists
page at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_linguists. M
Many people are not listed there; others need to have more facts and
information
added. If you would like to participate in this exciting update effort,
please
respond by sending an email to LINGUIST Editor Hannah Morales at
hannah(a)linguistlist.org, suggesting what your role might be or which
linguistics
entries you feel should be updated or added. Some linguists who saw our
campaign
on the Internet have already written us with specific suggestions, which we
will
share with you soon.
This update project will take major time and effort on all our parts. The
end
result will be a much richer internet resource of information on the breadth
and
depth of the field of linguistics. Our efforts should also stimulate
prospective
students to consider studying linguistics and to educate a wider public on
what
we do. Please consider participating.
Sincerely,
Hannah Morales
Editor, Wikipedia Update Project
Linguistic Field(s): Not Applicable
-----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-18-1831
Tim Starling wrote:
> According to ru.wp Arbcom member DR, the danger to Wikipedia was
> overstated, and the text of the proposed law was misrepresented.
I think that the interpretation to the bill given by DR is incorrect. In fact the proposed bill was not only about child pornography and extremism, but also about drugs and, about “information, prompting children to commit actions, making threat to their life and health”. That was a very loose clause, that could ban virtually anything. After the blackout this clause was removed from the bill and it is a clear achievement of the strike. On the other hand the final version of the bill contains another clause, that is even more hazardous to us. It is about “information of methods of producing and use of narcotic substances, … of methods and places of cultivation of narcotic plants”. We do have information of drug synthesis on Wikipedia, ways of its use (e.g. marijuana) and we do have thorough instructions of marijuana cultivation on wikibooks. That is why our achievements are ambiguous. On the one hand we have a removal of a loose clause about information harmful to children, but on the otherwe now have another clause that is even more dangerous. That is why we are still trying to do what we can via our contacts within the authorities to revise the passed bill.
But that is not all. The most important issue is extremism. According to the bill, the materials, that are banned for distribution in Russia should be included to the register of banned information on the ground of the court decision, banning the distribution of that information in Russia. We already have such court decisions and a list of extremist materials, distribution of which is prohibited in Russia. That list contains some really nasty materials, as e.g. nazi propaganda, but also Islamic texts (including those of famous non-terrorist Islamic authors e.g. Said Nursî), Saentologist, Jehova’s witnesses , Falun Gong, letters and materials of opposition in Russia, works of contemporary art, etc.
We *do have* banned extremist materials in Wikipedia. E.g. this image:
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Файл:Александр_Савко_Путешествия_Микки_Мауса_п… искусства.jpeg
is considered extremist and is banned for distribution in Russia. (Hopefully it was uploaded two years before it was regulated as banned by the court).
This letter in wikisource is also considered extremist:
http://ru.wikisource.org/wiki/Всем,_кто_сочувствует_жертвам_бесланского_тер…!
This is enough for banning the IPs of Wikimedia projects in Russia. And I am really afraid of this.
I guess DR is aware of discussion on this list, but anyway I will inform him of it. Maybe he has something to add.
> According to Levg in his Arbcom application, again via Google
> Translate, "It should be noted that there are no objective reasons for
> such a 'sprint survey' did not exist, to discuss the bill on second
> reading has been known since at least last Friday."
That is our fault that we could not manage to get the information in time. The first hearing was on Friday, but the community and myself got to know about the problem only on Monday, 9th. What for me personally I haven’t read the news on the weekend (yes, it is bad, that I relaxed on the weekend and haven’t read the news), and I failed to get to know about the problem in time. I guess it is also true for others. If we start to organize on Friday, the result would be better. It is a fault, but anyway it was not a deliberate fault, as nobody has informed the community earlier.
*Hi everyone,
It's been a bit since I last emailed this list (or any list, for that
matter!)... you may remember me, I worked at the Foundation last year in
the Community Department, working with Philippe on any number of issues,
as well as with the OTRS team. I've come back to work on a short term
project with the Foundation, and I have to say it's great to be back!
(and a great break from my Master's thesis!)
We're getting ready to run the next version of the Editor Survey, for
August 2012. This will be the third incarnation we've run since 2011.
As with the prior incarnations of the survey, we'll be looking at a
variety of topics, this time with the goal of not only understanding
your needs and pressing issues while interacting with fellow editors,
but also focusing on editors' satisfaction with the work of the Foundation.
The last time we ran an editor survey, it was completed by over 6,000
respondents. When you break that down, it means that each minute of
time demanded by the survey corresponds to 100 hours of Wikipedians'
time. We want to make sure that this time is spent wisely, ensuring
that the questions we have are worded clearly, don't cause confusion,
and will generate meaningful answers. So we'd like to ask you to take a
look at the survey, and give us feedback on the questions. You can find
them here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_Editor_Survey_August_201…
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Research:Wikipedia_Editor_Surv…>
... and please leave your feedback on the talk page there so we can keep
the discussion in one place :)
You can find out more information about the survey here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_Editor_Survey_August_2012
Also, we are planning an IRC Office Hour on the survey, this **Tuesday,
July 31 at 1700 UTC.** (See
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hoursfor general information
about IRC Office hours)
I know there has been some discussion about offering Office Hours in a
broader range of times, and I know this time may not be the greatest for
some... but this was the best time we could find currently.
Thanks everyone!!
-Christine
Wikimedia Foundation*
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 08:54:38 -0400
> From: Nathan <nawrich(a)gmail.com>
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX
> and such
> Message-ID:
> <CALKX9dTTP_GOQgXjOn3ftcwbhBCmRBfkm=yJtnh_2RCT=
> zR0sQ(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> No one will argue these days that the WMF is short of money, so this is a
> good opportunity for it to deploy some of that funding for a real impact.
> The main page on the English Wikipedia is an ideal starting point for a
> conscious effort at design evolution throughout Wikimedia. The Foundation
> should solicit and pay for several design firms to submit efforts to the
> main page contest, which is in dire need of some talented input. The
> community can still select between them, let's just make sure they have a
> number of great options.
>
>
>
We should by now have enough user data to be able to calculate user
retention rates by skin. It would be interesting to see how the
implementation of Vector affected editor retention rates.
WSC
Heya folks :)
The next Wikidata office hours are coming up. You're invited to come
and ask your questions - technical or non-technical. Some of the
things to talk about are for example the things listed in the "This
needs your input" box on http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata but
other topics are welcome as well.
Unlike previous Wikidata office hours we'll be doing this one in
#wikimedia-office.
English: 5 Sept. at 8:00 UTC
(http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?hour=08&min=00&sec=0&d…)
German: 6. Sept. at 16:00 UTC
(http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?hour=16&min=00&sec=0&d…)
Hope to see many of you there.
Cheers
Lydia
--
Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher
Community Communications for Wikidata
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.
Obentrautstr. 72
10963 Berlin
www.wikimedia.de
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg
unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das
Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
Good day,
I'm pleased to announce you the creation of Wikimedia Indigenous Languages
(WIL). WIL is the coordinating body for the promotion and development of
indigenous on Wikimedia projects.
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Indigenous_Languages (or just
search WIL on Meta)
Wikimedia Indigenous Languages' vision is to see the sum of the knowledge
available to everybody in their own languages and to share the knowledge of
those languages themselves. It will achieve that by:
- Reaching indigenous languages speakers for the development of Wikimedia
projects in their language
- Establishing working cooperation with outside organizations involved in
the promotion of indigenous languages
- Creating and expanding Wikimedia projects in all indigenous languages
Wikimedia Indigenous Languages' role is to support and encourage the
efforts of specific projects to develop Wikimedia projects in small and
endangered languages. It will serve as an international body to collect and
share best practices, lessons learned and methodology to develop small
languages Wikimedia projects and preserve endangered languages. It will
also offer support to people interested in developing initiatives and new
projects. It will also become the point of contact to set up cooperation
with other organizations working towards the same goals and will also
actively seek such cooperation opportunities.
Anybody or any group who is interested in this project or any projects with
indigenous languages are welcome to join Wikimedia Indigenous Languages.
For questions or further discussion, come on the talk page, and a dedicated
mailing list to discuss languages-related issue and initiatives will soon
be crated.
Thanks,
JP Béland
(alias Amqui)
Something I don't see in the FAQ - could the use of WMF funds to
defend someone for actions taken in a project role imperil the
immunity of the WMF? If the organization is seen to provide for the
defense of its functionaries, and describes those people as taking
"official action" in its FAQ, is there any bleedover risk for the
Foundation itself?
Nathan
On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 4:35 PM, Geoff Brigham <gbrigham(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Note: You may also read this announcement in DE - ES - FR - IT - JA - RU
>
> Many Wikimedians take on key support roles that help ensure that the
> community’s projects run smoothly and effectively. The Wikimedia Foundation
> -- under the lead of the Finance Department and the Legal and Community
> Advocacy Department -- is proposing the Legal Fees Assistance Program. This
> program is intended to help find qualified lawyers or pay for the legal
> defense fees of eligible users in specified support roles. The assistance
> would be available in the unlikely event those users were ever named in a
> legal complaint as a defendant because of their support roles on any
> Wikimedia project. The program would apply to all projects and languages.
>
> We have started a request for comment to see what the community thinks of
> this proposed initiative, and we would like those who are interested to look
> at the proposed program itself and let us know your thoughts. If you have
> further questions, we have prepared an FAQ, and we will be available to
> discuss via the talk pages.
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Geoff
>
> Geoff Brigham
> General Counsel
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> Garfield
>
> Garfield Byrd
> Chief of Finance and Administration
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately
> directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community.
> For more information about Wikimedia-l:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> _______________________________________________
> WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
> WikimediaAnnounce-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
>
Greetings All,
The official release of the WLM Android App has been published on the
Google Play store!
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.wikipedia.wlm
Now is the time to download the app from Google Play and tell us if
there are any issues before the contest starts on September 1st. All
uploads go to Commons, so send photos that you want the world to see.
In just a few days we've seen some amazing uploads including:
*
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Torre_de_H%C3%A9rcules_(taken_on_30A…
*
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Union_Square_(taken_on_27Aug2012_13h…
*
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Southern_Pacific_Railroad_Locomotive…
and you can see all of our mobile uploads below:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Uploaded_with_Android_WLM_App
For those of you in San Francsico, come by to the third floor to see a
visualization of all the mobile uploads on the big screen in admin
alley. If your not with us then you can load:
http://jonrobson.me.uk/wlm/to see the same. We took the majority of
these photos on Monday when the
team took a break from development and wandered San Francisco, Tucson, and
Chicago to field test our app. This was one of the best ways that we could
test our app. Since Monday we've seen amazing photos from Pittsburgh, South
Dakota, Mexico, and Spain from Wikipedians that we know and numerous that
we don't. We love when this happens!
Please write to us with any comments so that we can make the app even
better.
Thank you for your cooperation and support, and let's make 2012 the
best year ever!
Best regards,
The WMF Mobile Team
--
Phil Inje Chang
Product Manager, Mobile
Wikimedia Foundation
415-812-0854 m
415-882-7982 x 6810
Hello all,
The Mid-Year Report for my position as US Cultural Partnerships Coordinator
is now available. >
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GLAM/US/Mid-Year_Report
This includes Highlights of the past months, details on the GLAM-Wiki US
Consortium, Challenges, and Implications.
Thanks so much,
Lori
*Cross-posting out of necessity to GLAM-L, GLAM-US, Libraries, Internal,
Cultural Partners (bear with me : )*
--
Lori Phillips
Digital Marketing Content Coordinator
The Children's Museum of Indianapolis
US Cultural Partnerships Coordinator
Wikimedia Foundation
703.489.6036 | http://loribyrdphillips.com/
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}