[WikiEN-l] "Software Weighs Wikipedians' Trustworthiness"

[Phil Sandifer]

Well, I guess we got beaten to the punch on stable versions.

-Phil


On Aug 5, 2007, at 2:04 AM, David Goodman wrote:

> from
> Chronicle of Higher Education, Wired Campus blog.
> http://chronicle.com/wiredcampus/index.php?id=2278
>
> "software that color-codes Wikipedia entries, identifying those
> portions deemed trustworthy and those that might be taken with a grain
> of salt.
>
> To determine which passages make the grade, the researchers analyzed
> Wikipedia's editing history, tracking material that has remained on
> the site for a long time and edits that have been quickly overruled. A
> Wikipedian with a distinguished record of unchanged edits is declared
> trustworthy, and his or her contributions are left untouched on the
> Santa Cruz team's color-coded pages. But a contributor whose posts
> have frequently been changed or deleted is considered suspect, and his
> or her content is highlighted in orange. (The darker the orange, the
> more spurious the content is thought to be.)"
>
> Examples at http://trust.cse.ucsc.edu/
>
> Wikimania 2007 talk:
> http://trust.cse.ucsc.edu/UCSC_Wiki_Lab
> action=AttachFile&do=get&target=wikimania07.pdf
>
> by
>  Luca de Alfaro
>  B. Thomas Adler
>  Marco Faella
>  Ian Pye
>  Caitlin Sadowski
>
> -- 
> David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l