Difference between revisions of "On Ranking Controversies in Wikipedia: Models and Evaluation"

From Wikipedia Quality
Jump to: navigation, search
(Basic information on On Ranking Controversies in Wikipedia: Models and Evaluation)
 
(Links)
Line 1: Line 1:
'''On Ranking Controversies in Wikipedia: Models and Evaluation''' - scientific work related to Wikipedia quality published in 2008, written by Ba-Quy Vuong, Ee-Peng Lim, Aixin Sun, Minh-Tam Le, Hady Wirawan Lauw and Kuiyu Chang.
+
'''On Ranking Controversies in Wikipedia: Models and Evaluation''' - scientific work related to [[Wikipedia quality]] published in 2008, written by [[Ba-Quy Vuong]], [[Ee-Peng Lim]], [[Aixin Sun]], [[Minh-Tam Le]], [[Hady Wirawan Lauw]] and [[Kuiyu Chang]].
  
 
== Overview ==
 
== Overview ==
Wikipedia 1 is a very large and successful Web 2.0 example. As the number of Wikipedia articles and contributors grows at a very fast pace, there are also increasing disputes occurring among the contributors. Disputes often happen in articles with controversial content. They also occur frequently among contributors who are "aggressive" or controversial in their personalities. In this paper, authors aim to identify controversial articles in Wikipedia. Authors propose three models, namely the Basic model and two Controversy Rank ( CR ) models. These models draw clues from collaboration and edit history instead of interpreting the actual articles or edited content. While the Basic model only considers the amount of disputes within an article, the two Controversy Rank models extend the former by considering the relationships between articles and contributors. Authors also derived enhanced versions of these models by considering the age of articles. Authors experiments on a collection of 19,456 Wikipedia articles shows that the Controversy Rank models can more effectively determine controversial articles compared to the Basic and other baseline models
+
Wikipedia 1 is a very large and successful Web 2.0 example. As the number of [[Wikipedia]] articles and contributors grows at a very fast pace, there are also increasing disputes occurring among the contributors. Disputes often happen in articles with controversial content. They also occur frequently among contributors who are "aggressive" or controversial in their personalities. In this paper, authors aim to identify controversial articles in Wikipedia. Authors propose three models, namely the Basic model and two Controversy Rank ( CR ) models. These models draw clues from collaboration and edit history instead of interpreting the actual articles or edited content. While the Basic model only considers the amount of disputes within an article, the two Controversy Rank models extend the former by considering the relationships between articles and contributors. Authors also derived enhanced versions of these models by considering the age of articles. Authors experiments on a collection of 19,456 Wikipedia articles shows that the Controversy Rank models can more effectively determine controversial articles compared to the Basic and other baseline models

Revision as of 09:43, 15 June 2019

On Ranking Controversies in Wikipedia: Models and Evaluation - scientific work related to Wikipedia quality published in 2008, written by Ba-Quy Vuong, Ee-Peng Lim, Aixin Sun, Minh-Tam Le, Hady Wirawan Lauw and Kuiyu Chang.

Overview

Wikipedia 1 is a very large and successful Web 2.0 example. As the number of Wikipedia articles and contributors grows at a very fast pace, there are also increasing disputes occurring among the contributors. Disputes often happen in articles with controversial content. They also occur frequently among contributors who are "aggressive" or controversial in their personalities. In this paper, authors aim to identify controversial articles in Wikipedia. Authors propose three models, namely the Basic model and two Controversy Rank ( CR ) models. These models draw clues from collaboration and edit history instead of interpreting the actual articles or edited content. While the Basic model only considers the amount of disputes within an article, the two Controversy Rank models extend the former by considering the relationships between articles and contributors. Authors also derived enhanced versions of these models by considering the age of articles. Authors experiments on a collection of 19,456 Wikipedia articles shows that the Controversy Rank models can more effectively determine controversial articles compared to the Basic and other baseline models