this is a fascinating thread, thanks for starting it, Iolanda.
For his PhD dissertation, Alan McConchie studied the impact of automated or bulk-imported
geodata on the growth and activity of the OSM editor community. I am copying him as he
might have some insights to share.
I also wanted to make a bold proposal to the list. We’ve been discussing for a while this
notion of "topic pages”, i.e. reviews on the state of the art of research on topic
areas of key interest to the Wikimedia community:
• these pages would be hosted on Meta, they would be maintained and curated by researchers
and community members and would include pointers to the relevant literature
• they could be used as the main resource for newbie wiki researchers and volunteers
interested in Wikipedia research but also as compact digests for existing researchers
about areas they haven’t explored
• what’s more, they could be forked at any point in time and turned into
conference/journal submission as review articles with major contributors as authors
• finally, they could include a section with unanswered research questions that could seed
further research.
Would people in this thread be interested in a pilot for a topic page on automatic article
creation in Wikimedia sites?
Dario
On Mar 17, 2014, at 3:49 AM, Iolanda Pensa <iolanda(a)pensa.it> wrote:
thanks for the very valuable information.
there is a History of Wikipedia bots [1]; I added your hints in the session
""rambot" and other small-town bots”. please do not hesitate to remove,
improve, correct.
yes, I am personally interested in geographic information (and its balance/unbalance) and
my interest in Rambot is related to the legend (or the fact) that the upload of
municipalities has triggered editing and similar bots and experiences on Wikipedia not
only in English. WikiData is definitely a game changer but I share the fascination for
ancient history and I think it might have some lessons to teach us.
thanks! iolanda/iopensa
[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:History_of_Wikipedia_bots
Il giorno 17/mar/2014, alle ore 10:44, Edward Summers <ehs(a)pobox.com> ha scritto:
On Mar 16, 2014, at 2:14 PM, R.Stuart Geiger
<sgeiger(a)gmail.com> wrote:
There are lots of papers about bots which throw
out the example of Rambot for a few sentences without dwelling on the case too much --
I'm certainly guilty of this, so I won't vanity cite them. However, Niederer and
van Dijck [1] spend a good amount of time discussing the Rambot case in detail in their
great NMS article. Andrew Lih's The Wikipedia Revolution [2] also goes pretty in-depth
into the history of Rambot, talking about came to be and what it did, along with some
controversies it created.
Thanks for sharing this Stuart. I for one would love to read a bibliography of research
about Wikipedia bots and automation :-)
//Ed
_______________________________________________
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