Difference between revisions of "Mind Your Pov: Convergence of Articles and Editors Towards Wikipedia's Neutrality Norm"
(Information about: Mind Your Pov: Convergence of Articles and Editors Towards Wikipedia's Neutrality Norm) |
(+ wikilinks) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | '''Mind Your Pov: Convergence of Articles and Editors Towards Wikipedia's Neutrality Norm''' - scientific work related to Wikipedia quality published in 2018, written by Umashanthi Pavalanathan, Xiaochuang Han and Jacob Eisenstein. | + | '''Mind Your Pov: Convergence of Articles and Editors Towards Wikipedia's Neutrality Norm''' - scientific work related to [[Wikipedia quality]] published in 2018, written by [[Umashanthi Pavalanathan]], [[Xiaochuang Han]] and [[Jacob Eisenstein]]. |
== Overview == | == Overview == | ||
| − | Wikipedia has a strong norm of writing in a 'neutral point of view' (NPOV). Articles that violate this norm are tagged, and editors are encouraged to make corrections. But the impact of this tagging system has not been quantitatively measured. Does NPOV tagging help articles to converge to the desired style? Do NPOV corrections encourage editors to adopt this style? Authors study these questions using a corpus of NPOV-tagged articles and a set of lexicons associated with biased language. An interrupted time series analysis shows that after an article is tagged for NPOV, there is a significant decrease in biased language in the article, as measured by several lexicons. However, for individual editors, NPOV corrections and talk page discussions yield no significant change in the usage of words in most of these lexicons, including Wikipedia's own list of 'words to watch.' This suggests that NPOV tagging and discussion does improve content, but has less success enculturating editors to the site's linguistic norms. | + | Wikipedia has a strong norm of writing in a '[[neutral point of view]]' (NPOV). Articles that violate this norm are tagged, and editors are encouraged to make corrections. But the impact of this tagging system has not been quantitatively measured. Does NPOV tagging help articles to converge to the desired style? Do NPOV corrections encourage editors to adopt this style? Authors study these questions using a corpus of NPOV-tagged articles and a set of lexicons associated with biased language. An interrupted time series analysis shows that after an article is tagged for NPOV, there is a significant decrease in biased language in the article, as measured by several lexicons. However, for individual editors, NPOV corrections and talk page discussions yield no significant change in the usage of words in most of these lexicons, including [[Wikipedia]]'s own list of 'words to watch.' This suggests that NPOV tagging and discussion does improve content, but has less success enculturating editors to the site's linguistic norms. |
Revision as of 14:23, 27 June 2020
Mind Your Pov: Convergence of Articles and Editors Towards Wikipedia's Neutrality Norm - scientific work related to Wikipedia quality published in 2018, written by Umashanthi Pavalanathan, Xiaochuang Han and Jacob Eisenstein.
Overview
Wikipedia has a strong norm of writing in a 'neutral point of view' (NPOV). Articles that violate this norm are tagged, and editors are encouraged to make corrections. But the impact of this tagging system has not been quantitatively measured. Does NPOV tagging help articles to converge to the desired style? Do NPOV corrections encourage editors to adopt this style? Authors study these questions using a corpus of NPOV-tagged articles and a set of lexicons associated with biased language. An interrupted time series analysis shows that after an article is tagged for NPOV, there is a significant decrease in biased language in the article, as measured by several lexicons. However, for individual editors, NPOV corrections and talk page discussions yield no significant change in the usage of words in most of these lexicons, including Wikipedia's own list of 'words to watch.' This suggests that NPOV tagging and discussion does improve content, but has less success enculturating editors to the site's linguistic norms.
