So fix it,
Cheers,
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of James
Salsman
Sent: Tuesday, 19 September 2017 2:53 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Research Showcase Wednesday, September 20, 2017 at 11:30 AM
(PST) 18:30 UTC
Wow, first there was solid evidence that tourism is causally influenced by Wikipedia, and
now science. The English Wikipedia's Economics article still says "Tax cuts
[boost] aggregate demand."
Isn't it time that potentially harmful biases in economics articles are tempered as
carefully as those in medical articles?
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 1:53 AM, Sarah R <srodlund(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
The next Research Showcase will be live-streamed this Wednesday,
September 20, 2017 at 11:30 AM (PST) 18:30 UTC.
YouTube stream:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VR5JwqyVGSk
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#September_2017>.
...
Science is Shaped by Wikipedia: Evidence from a Randomized Control
Trial By Neil C. Thompson and Douglas Hanley
As the largest encyclopedia in the world, it is not surprising that
Wikipedia reflects the state of scientific knowledge. However,
Wikipedia is also one of the most accessed websites in the world,
including by scientists, which suggests that it also has the potential
to shape science. This paper shows that it does. Incorporating ideas
into a Wikipedia article leads to those ideas being used more in the
scientific literature. This paper documents this in two ways:
correlationally across thousands of articles in Wikipedia and causally
through a randomized experiment where we added new scientific content
to Wikipedia. We find that fully a third of the correlational
relationship is causal, implying that Wikipedia has a strong shaping
effect on science. Our findings speak not only to the influence of
Wikipedia, but more broadly to the influence of repositories of
scientific knowledge. The results suggest that increased provision of
information in accessible repositories is a very cost-effective way to
advance science. We also find that such gains are equity-improving,
disproportionately benefitting those without
_______________________________________________
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>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com