Wikipedia

User:Piotrus/Sandbox/Prof

< User:Piotrus‎ | Sandbox

research edit

research ideas edit

  • popularity of milhist project on en and pl wikis
  • demographics study of editors
  • comparison of English and Polish wikipedias
  • more on governance of Wikipedia (comparison of ArbCom practices, Jimbo's influence on other Wikis, are there Jimbo-like figures elsewhere on non-en projects?)
  • rules enforcement (legal systems) and cultures (comparison of Wikipedias)
  • impact of Wikipedia experience as an editor on editors approach to work and non-wiki organizations they are part of
  • is Wikipedia/wikis experience really democratizing/liberating?
  • study of nationalism
  • evolution of user pages through time
  • Free culture movement / Open Access movement / Free and Open Source Software movement
  • addiction to Wikipedia / Wikipedia as a cult
  • attitudes, use and abuse of WP:IAR over the years
  • attitude towards most active / selfless volunteers
  • which DYKs are popular?
  • teaching: instructor/ambassador experience/activity vs. students achievements
  • comparison of GA/FA in different fields (ex. plants vs biographies)
  • "and my experience is that there are 3 cities in the US that have the most active volunteer communities. NYC, DC, Boston. NYC and DC have chapters, and Boston has a proto-chapter and DC and Boston clearly come a bit out of the coincidence of having the NYC model nearby"
  • voting on Wikipedia / a reply/discussion to [1]
  • test code heaviness (LDR?) vs editor editing experience (newbies vs experienced?)
  • analysis of Popular pages: topics by country, their quality and importance
  • userboxes as SNS
  • gamification on Wikipedia, WP:CUP
  • issues covered by WP:SOCIO; perhaps as an argument that gender equality topics are poorly covered reflecting gender gap?
  • gender inequality by number of bios lived/died per year and country, create an index (done-published)
  • ethnographic analysis (Darek published a book on that)
  • process of writing an article
  • collaboration is a myth: most articles are written by one editor and polished by few others whose changes are nonetheless minor
  • decline in activity: impact on projects, editors perception
  • quality of arguments in RfA
  • Wiki PR scandal / Snowden affair
  • SOPA reactions from the community not editors based on blog comments at [2]
  • new editor retention: "The reality is that defacto standards have risen on the English language Wikipedia to the point where uncited additions of facts are now very likely to be rejected, but conversely newbies who add cited facts are highly unlikely to be reverted unless they edit in a controversial topic. It is the uncited changes to articles that are highly likely to be rejected."
  • protests in Italy, Ukraine, elsewhere?
  • views of vandalism from a qualitative perspective - what do vandal fighters think of vandalism and their own job?
  • Correlate instructor wiki knowledge with course results
  • a study on Google Book use and it's effects on research
  • comparison of ASA's and APS's Wikipedia initiatives
  • discussion headers
  • (done-in review)correlate country wiki size to factors like population (done-published)
  • Polanball, del discussions, pl wiki reaction ([3]).
  • ethnographic ? analysis of Wikipedians attitude to the missing women problem
  • retention of students
  • mini oligarchies making decisions, with dynamically changing memberships (adhocracies), enforcing rules. Coin a term for tiny adhocratic oligarchies restricting the flow of information (per canvassing)?
  • Wikipedia Zero piracy in Bangladesh; bureaucracy; chilling effects; too few cooks; translation gaps - free culture values split: Wikipedia Zero vs pirates
  • citing wikipedia: practices, objections, when to do, etc. See brief notes in Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2016-09-29/News and notes
  • quirks of notability. Differences between local Wikipedias. Uneven coverage of topics.
  • spam / WP:CORPSPAM
  • professor attitudes to teaching with Wikipediaa (done-published)
  • why educators who taught with Wiki and even published about it don't do it again (often) (done-in review)
  • Israeli war crimes commission and identification of errors in academic works on Wikipedia
  • teaching with Wikipedia as a PBL activity
  • ESL students and Wikipedia (done-published)
  • demographics of Eng wiki admins (white males?)
  • WP:VITAL, Wikipedia_talk:Vital_articles/Level/5, [4]
  • are most volunteers who edit about non-native English topics expats? Most active Polish editors on en wiki are expats. How about other ethnicities?
  • Wikivoyage and tourism
  • meta book reviews
  • favoritism: admins
  • favoritism: face-fo-face (wikimania/meetups?)
  • size of university's wiki article and choice of exchange students
  • notability of academics by field, citations by field, citation counts of academics who had biographies deleted
  • User:Levivich/NFooty_AfDs#One_in_every_six_BLPs_are_about_football_players
  • new editor retention: why new editors retire? bad experiences with being biten?
  • what do blocked editors think about the justice of punishment they received?
  • quality of PJ topics based on reviews by academic experts
  • analysis of student peer review / feedback
  • SYSTEMICBIAS (pro-US, pro-Western) in Wikipedia:In the news and selected anniversaries (done-in review)
  • Israeli war crimes commission and identification of errors in academic works on Wikipedia
  • SYSTEMICBIAS and political prisoners (a concept that is controversial to Westerners but not to "Eastern Europeans"): Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2021 August 4
  • CANVASS and its pros/cons
  • sources cited by all Wikipedias by language used (done-in review)
  • does the closure ratio of discussions (RfCs) differ by topic area? In particular, are controversial (contentious) topic areas suffering from lower closure ratio?
  • Polish-Lithuanian identity
  • Why is Italian Wikipedia very deletionist/high notability req and what does it mean for the project's usefulness?
  • historiography of Bloody Wednesday of Olkusz
  • writing articles: amateurs vs professionals. In fiction: List of examples and fancrufty plot summaries vs analysis.

Wikipedia and the Public Understanding of the Current Economic Crisis and its Social Impacts edit

I would like to focus on examining the public understanding of the current economic crisis as reflected on the website that most of them (us) turn to for such information: Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.

Wikipedia serves the as the primary source of information on many topics for majority of Internet users, in USA and abroad. As recent studies have shown, people have turned overwhelmingly to Wikipedia to learn about people (Sarah Palin), as well as short and long term events (death of Michael Jackson, global influenza pandemics, Arab Spring, Occupy protests, and others). Wikipedia's article on “Late-2000s financial crisis” has a daily readership of about 3,000; on “Late-2000s recession”, of about 2,000, on “Subprime mortgage crisis”, of about 4,000, on “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009“, of about 1,500 – and they form only a tip o the iceberg of more than a hundred related articles (in English-language Wikipedia alone). Even assuming overlapping and repeated readership, the numbers suggest that over the past several years those articles have been accessed by a significant proportion of the world's English speakers. Furthermore, on Wikipedia, the public is not limited to passive consumption of information – it can take an active role in shaping the information present there. As such, Wikipedia is not only the source of information for the public; it is at the same time the reflection of what the public knows. I would therefore hypothesize that by looking at how Wikipedia's coverage the economic downturn has evolved over the past few years, we can get a very helpful picture of the public's understanding of the current economic crisis.

Countering Systematic Bias: How International is the English Wikipedia? = edit

English-language Wikipedia has often been called “the international Wikipedia”, as it is much more often used by non-native English speakers than non-English Wikipedia's are used by speakers of languages not native to that particular edition. At the same time, a number of published papers as well other media have criticized the English Wikipedia for being focused primarily on the English-speaking (Western) topics.

This study would attempt to analyze to what degree English Wikipedia coverage is biased towards the English (Western) topics, and compare it with non-English Wikipedia's, in the attempt to analyze the extent of the bias on those projects. It would also attempt to answer which topics are more likely to be covered (ex. history), and which are less likely (ex. politics), and try to determine whether there are any regional or global patterns influencing this coverage.

Why is Wikipedia not popular in Korea? edit

This paper focuses on answering why Korean Wikipedia is smaller than we would expect, and contributes to our understanding of peer / collective culture / volunteering communities / Korean Internet. I call this RQ1 paper. A related RQ1beta concerns motivations of people: why Koreans contribute more to Naver KiN or Korean wikis, but most Westerns, to Wikipedia?

Korean students, Internet use and digital literacy edit

This paper focuses on comparing Korean students to American (and Polish?) ones, focusing on their skills. In the recent year, a number of papers have been published showing how American (and European) students are using Wikipedia as their primary research tool. I think this is not the case here; in Korea, most students probably use different tools. Showing this, and analyzing this, would add to our understanding of how modern student digital literacy and research skills are impacted by regional characteristics.

in progress edit

policies edit

(doesn't look at when did the editor gain adminship)

  • WP:NOT: 5: regular - 3, admin - 2; 5: r - 3, a - 2
  • WP:NPOV: 5: r - 4, a+ - 1; 5: r - 4, a - 1
  • WP:COPYRIGHTS: 5: r-1, a-3, a+1, 5: r-1, a-4
  • WP:ETIQ: 5: r-2, a-2, a+1, 5: r-4, a-1
  • WP:IAR: 5: r-3, a-2 5: r-4, a-1

Teaching with wikis edit

Books edit

  • If I got a penny each time I heard "this is not science fiction"

Specific research questions edit

publication edit

style edit

  • methodology: this case study compares... drawing on archival data, participant observations and surveys...we examine... having estabilished... I draw on theory to conduct a grounded analysis of my data to indeity conditions that could account for... I focus... this comparison reveals... the data on which this analysis is based is drawn from sources and my experiences... I explain...
  • exploratory research can provide others with ... inspire others to improve our knowledge about this increasingly important aspect of social movements

OA journals edit

Not OA journals edit

Rankings edit

Praca edit

fellow, grants, awards edit

Szukaj edit

To read edit

  • [23]
  • While collaboration patterns in English Wikipedia have been studied extensively, there is a lack of understanding of how editors collaborate within different Wikipedia language communities. Indeed, few studies in this area hint at significant differences in collaboration patterns across language communities and highlight the importance of not applying knowledge learned from English Wikipedia to other language communities (Bipat et al., 2018, Hara et al., 2010, Nemoto & Gloor, 2011). A qualitative study reports different coordination and writing organization dynamics across three Wikipedia language communities (Bipat et al., 2018). A network analysis study of the article creation process across five Wikipedia language communities suggests cultural differences may relate to collaboration patterns. These differences can be associated with variations in articles’ growth patterns and conflict resolution processes (Nemoto & Gloor, 2011). For example, there is high official involvement in conflict resolution in the English Wikipedia, but the process is less formal in other languages such as Finnish.

Presentations edit

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Piotrus/Sandbox/Prof&oldid=1187582485"