WikiLinkGraphs: A Complete, Longitudinal and Multi-Language Dataset of the Wikipedia Link Networks

Wikipedia articles contain multiple links connecting a subject to other pages of the encyclopedia. In Wikipedia parlance, these links are called internal links or wikilinks. We present a complete dataset of the network of internal Wikipedia links for the $9$ largest language editions. The dataset contains yearly snapshots of the network and spans $17$ years, from the creation of Wikipedia in 2001 to March 1st, 2018. While previous work has mostly focused on the complete hyperlink graph which includes also links automatically generated by templates, we parsed each revision of each article to track links appearing in the main text. In this way we obtained a cleaner network, discarding more than half of the links and representing all and only the links intentionally added by editors. We describe in detail how the Wikipedia dumps have been processed and the challenges we have encountered, including the need to handle special pages such as redirects, i.e., alternative article titles. We present descriptive statistics of several snapshots of this network. Finally, we propose several research opportunities that can be explored using this new dataset.Comment: 10 pages, 3 figures, 7 tables, LaTeX. Final camera-ready version accepted at the 13TH International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (ICWSM 2019) - Munich (Germany), 11-14 June 201

Eliciting New Wikipedia Users' Interests via Automatically Mined Questionnaires: For a Warm Welcome, Not a Cold Start

Every day, thousands of users sign up as new Wikipedia contributors. Once joined, these users have to decide which articles to contribute to, which users to seek out and learn from or collaborate with, etc. Any such task is a hard and potentially frustrating one given the sheer size of Wikipedia. Supporting newcomers in their first steps by recommending articles they would enjoy editing or editors they would enjoy collaborating with is thus a promising route toward converting them into long-term contributors. Standard recommender systems, however, rely on users' histories of previous interactions with the platform. As such, these systems cannot make high-quality recommendations to newcomers without any previous interactions -- the so-called cold-start problem. The present paper addresses the cold-start problem on Wikipedia by developing a method for automatically building short questionnaires that, when completed by a newly registered Wikipedia user, can be used for a variety of purposes, including article recommendations that can help new editors get started. Our questionnaires are constructed based on the text of Wikipedia articles as well as the history of contributions by the already onboarded Wikipedia editors. We assess the quality of our questionnaire-based recommendations in an offline evaluation using historical data, as well as an online evaluation with hundreds of real Wikipedia newcomers, concluding that our method provides cohesive, human-readable questions that perform well against several baselines. By addressing the cold-start problem, this work can help with the sustainable growth and maintenance of Wikipedia's diverse editor community.Comment: Accepted at the 13th International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (ICWSM-2019

Structuring Wikipedia Articles with Section Recommendations

Sections are the building blocks of Wikipedia articles. They enhance readability and can be used as a structured entry point for creating and expanding articles. Structuring a new or already existing Wikipedia article with sections is a hard task for humans, especially for newcomers or less experienced editors, as it requires significant knowledge about how a well-written article looks for each possible topic. Inspired by this need, the present paper defines the problem of section recommendation for Wikipedia articles and proposes several approaches for tackling it. Our systems can help editors by recommending what sections to add to already existing or newly created Wikipedia articles. Our basic paradigm is to generate recommendations by sourcing sections from articles that are similar to the input article. We explore several ways of defining similarity for this purpose (based on topic modeling, collaborative filtering, and Wikipedia's category system). We use both automatic and human evaluation approaches for assessing the performance of our recommendation system, concluding that the category-based approach works best, achieving precision@10 of about 80% in the human evaluation.Comment: SIGIR '18 camera-read

Evolution of wikipedia’s medical content: past, present and future

As one of the most commonly read online sources of medical information, Wikipedia is an influential public health platform. Its medical content, community, collaborations and challenges have been evolving since its creation in 2001, and engagement by the medical community is vital for ensuring its accuracy and completeness. Both the encyclopaedia’s internal metrics as well as external assessments of its quality indicate that its articles are highly variable, but improving. Although content can be edited by anyone, medical articles are primarily written by a core group of medical professionals. Diverse collaborative ventures have enhanced medical article quality and reach, and opportunities for partnerships are more available than ever. Nevertheless, Wikipedia’s medical content and community still face significant challenges, and a socioecological model is used to structure specific recommendations. We propose that the medical community should prioritise the accuracy of biomedical information in the world’s most consulted encyclopaedia

Wikipedia Citations: A comprehensive dataset of citations with identifiers extracted from English Wikipedia

Wikipedia's contents are based on reliable and published sources. To this date, relatively little is known about what sources Wikipedia relies on, in part because extracting citations and identifying cited sources is challenging. To close this gap, we release Wikipedia Citations, a comprehensive dataset of citations extracted from Wikipedia. A total of 29.3M citations were extracted from 6.1M English Wikipedia articles as of May 2020, and classified as being to books, journal articles or Web contents. We were thus able to extract 4.0M citations to scholarly publications with known identifiers -- including DOI, PMC, PMID, and ISBN -- and further equip an extra 261K citations with DOIs from Crossref. As a result, we find that 6.7% of Wikipedia articles cite at least one journal article with an associated DOI, and that Wikipedia cites just 2% of all articles with a DOI currently indexed in the Web of Science. We release our code to allow the community to extend upon our work and update the dataset in the future

Examining the Impact of Algorithm Awareness on Wikidata's Recommender System Recoin

The global infrastructure of the Web, designed as an open and transparent system, has a significant impact on our society. However, algorithmic systems of corporate entities that neglect those principles increasingly populated the Web. Typical representatives of these algorithmic systems are recommender systems that influence our society both on a scale of global politics and during mundane shopping decisions. Recently, such recommender systems have come under critique for how they may strengthen existing or even generate new kinds of biases. To this end, designers and engineers are increasingly urged to make the functioning and purpose of recommender systems more transparent. Our research relates to the discourse of algorithm awareness, that reconsiders the role of algorithm visibility in interface design. We conducted online experiments with 105 participants using MTurk for the recommender system Recoin, a gadget for Wikidata. In these experiments, we presented users with one of a set of three different designs of Recoin's user interface, each of them exhibiting a varying degree of explainability and interactivity. Our findings include a positive correlation between comprehension of and trust in an algorithmic system in our interactive redesign. However, our results are not conclusive yet, and suggest that the measures of comprehension, fairness, accuracy and trust are not yet exhaustive for the empirical study of algorithm awareness. Our qualitative insights provide a first indication for further measures. Our study participants, for example, were less concerned with the details of understanding an algorithmic calculation than with who or what is judging the result of the algorithm.Comment: 10 pages, 7 figure