Movatterモバイル変換

[0]ホーム
URL:

Keyboard Shortcuts

Thread View

  • j: Next unread message
  • k: Previous unread message
  • j a: Jump to all threads
  • j l: Jump to MailingList overview
List overview
Download

Wikimedia-lOctober 2012

wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  • 129 participants
  • 94 discussions
Start a nNew thread
This paper (first reference) is the result of a class project I was part ofalmost two years ago for CSCI 5417 Information Retrieval Systems. It buildson a class project I did in CSCI 5832 Natural Language Processing and whichI presented at Wikimania '07. The project was very late as we didn't sendthe final paper in until the day before new years. This technical report wasnever really announced that I recall so I thought it would be interesting tolook briefly at the results. The goal of this paper was to break articlesdown into surface features and latent features and then use those to studythe rating system being used, predict article quality and rank results in asearch engine. We used the [[random forests]] classifier which allowed us toanalyze the contribution of each feature to performance by looking directlyat the weights that were assigned. While the surface analysis was performedon the whole english wikipedia, the latent analysis was performed on thesimple english wikipedia (it is more expensive to compute). = Surfacefeatures = * Readability measures are the single best predictor of qualitythat I have found, as defined by the Wikipedia Editorial Team (WET). The[[Automated Readability Index]], [[Gunning Fog Index]] and [[Flesch-KincaidGrade Level]] were the strongest predictors, followed by length of articlehtml, number of paragraphs, [[Flesh Reading Ease]], [[Smog Grading]], numberof internal links, [[Laesbarhedsindex Readability Formula]], number of wordsand number of references. Weakly predictive were number of to be's, numberof sentences, [[Coleman-Liau Index]], number of templates, PageRank, numberof external links, number of relative links. Not predictive (overall - seethe end of section 2 for the per-rating score breakdown): Number of h2 orh3's, number of conjunctions, number of images*, average word length, numberof h4's, number of prepositions, number of pronouns, number of interlanguagelinks, average syllables per word, number of nominalizations, article age(based on page id), proportion of questions, average sentence length. :*Number of images was actually by far the single strongest predictor of anyclass, but only for Featured articles. Because it was so good at picking outfeatured articles and somewhat good at picking out A and G articles theclassifier was confused in so many cases that the overall contribution ofthis feature to classification performance is zero. :* Number of externallinks is strongly predictive of Featured articles. :* The B class is highlydistinctive. It has a strong "signature," with high predictive valueassigned to many features. The Featured class is also very distinctive. F, Band S (Stop/Stub) contain the most information. :* A is the least distinct class, not being very different from F or G. =Latent features = The algorithm used for latent analysis, which is ananalysis of the occurence of words in every document with respect to thelink structure of the encyclopedia ("concepts"), is [[Latent DirichletAllocation]]. This part of the analysis was done by CS PhD student PrafulMangalath. An example of what can be done with the result of this analysisis that you provide a word (a search query) such as "hippie". You can thenlook at the weight of every article for the word hippie. You can pick thearticle with the largest weight, and then look at its link network. You canpick out the articles that this article links to and/or which link to thisarticle that are also weighted strongly for the word hippie, while alsocontributing maximally to this articles "hippieness". We tried this query inour system (LDA), Google (site:en.wikipedia.org hippie), and the SimpleEnglish Wikipedia's Lucene search engine. The breakdown of articles occuringin the top ten search results for this word for those engines is: * LDAonly: [[Acid rock]], [[Aldeburgh Festival]], [[Anne Murray]], [[CarlRadle]], [[Harry Nilsson]], [[Jack Kerouac]], [[Phil Spector]], [[PlasticOno Band]], [[Rock and Roll]], [[Salvador Allende]], [[Smothers brothers]],[[Stanley Kubrick]]. * Google only: [[Glam Rock]], [[South Park]]. * Simpleonly: [[African Americans]], [[Charles Manson]], [[Counterculture]], [[Druguse]], [[Flower Power]], [[Nuclear weapons]], [[Phish]], [[Sexualliberation]], [[Summer of Love]] * LDA & Google & Simple: [[Hippie]],[[Human Be-in]], [[Students for a democratic society]], [[Woodstockfestival]] * LDA & Google: [[Psychedelic Pop]] * Google & Simple: [[Lysergicacid diethylamide]], [[Summer of Love]] ( See the paper for the articlesproduced for the keywords philosophy and economics ) = Discussion /Conclusion = * The results of the latent analysis are totally up to yourperception. But what is interesting is that the LDA features predict the WETratings of quality just as well as the surface level features. Both featuresets (surface and latent) both pull out all almost of the information thatthe rating system bears. * The rating system devised by the WET is notdistinctive. You can best tell the difference between, grouped together,Featured, A and Good articles vs B articles. Featured, A and Good articlesare also quite distinctive (Figure 1). Note that in this study we didn'tlook at Start's and Stubs, but in earlier paper we did. :* This isinteresting when compared to this recent entry on the YouTube blog. "FiveStars Dominate Ratings"http://youtube-global.blogspot.com/2009/09/five-stars-dominate-ratings.html…I think a sane, well researched (with actual subjects) rating systemiswell within the purview of the Usability Initiative. Helping people find andcreate good content is what Wikipedia is all about. Having a solid ratingsystem allows you to reorganized the user interface, the Wikipedianamespace, and the main namespace around good content and bad content asneeded. If you don't have a solid, information bearing rating system youdon't know what good content really is (really bad content is easy to spot).:* My Wikimania talk was all about gathering data from people about articlesand using that to train machines to automatically pick out good content. Youask people questions along dimensions that make sense to people, and givethe machine access to other surface features (such as a statistical measureof readability, or length) and latent features (such as can be derived fromdocument word occurence and encyclopedia link structure). I referenced page262 of Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance to give an example of thekind of qualitative features I would ask people. It really depends on whatfeatures end up bearing information, to be tested in "the lab". Each word isan example dimension of quality: We have "*unity, vividness, authority,economy, sensitivity, clarity, emphasis, flow, suspense, brilliance,precision, proportion, depth and so on.*" You then use surface and latentfeatures to predict these values for all articles. You can also say, when aperson rates this article as high on the x scale, they also mean that it hashas this much of these surface and these latent features.= References = - DeHoust, C., Mangalath, P., Mingus., B. (2008). *Improving search in Wikipedia through quality and concept discovery*. Technical Report.PDF<http://grey.colorado.edu/mediawiki/sites/mingus/images/6/68/DeHoustMangalat…> - Rassbach, L., Mingus., B, Blackford, T. (2007). *Exploring the feasibility of automatically rating online article quality*. Technical Report. PDF<http://grey.colorado.edu/mediawiki/sites/mingus/images/d/d3/RassbachPincock…>
3 2
0 0
Hoi,I have asked and received permission to forward to you all this mostexcellent bit of news.The linguist list, is a most excellent resource for people interested in thefield of linguistics. As I mentioned some time ago they have had a fundingdrive and in that funding drive they asked for a certain amount of money ina given amount of days and they would then have a project on Wikipedia tolearn what needs doing to get better coverage for the field of linguistics.What you will read in this mail that the total community of linguists areasked to cooperate. I am really thrilled as it will also get us morelinguists interested in what we do. My hope is that a fraction will beinterested in the languages that they care for and help it become morerelevant. As a member of the "language prevention committee", I love to getmore knowledgeable people involved in our smaller projects. If it means thatwe get more requests for more projects we will really feel embarrassed withall the new projects we will have to approve because of the quality of theIncubator content and the quality of the linguistic arguments why we shouldapprove yet another language :)NB Is this not a really clever way of raising money; give us this much inthis time frame and we will then do this as a bonus...Thanks, GerardM---------- Forwarded message ----------From: LINGUIST Network <linguist(a)linguistlist.org>Date: Jun 18, 2007 6:53 PMSubject: 18.1831, All: Call for Participation: Wikipedia VolunteersTo: LINGUIST(a)listserv.linguistlist.orgLINGUIST List: Vol-18-1831. Mon Jun 18 2007. ISSN: 1068 - 4875.Subject: 18.1831, All: Call for Participation: Wikipedia VolunteersModerators: Anthony Aristar, Eastern Michigan U <aristar(a)linguistlist.org> Helen Aristar-Dry, Eastern Michigan U <hdry(a)linguistlist.org>Reviews: Laura Welcher, Rosetta Project <reviews(a)linguistlist.org>Homepage:http://linguistlist.org/The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University,and donations from subscribers and publishers.Editor for this issue: Ann Sawyer <sawyer(a)linguistlist.org>================================================================To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form athttp://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html===========================Directory==============================1)Date: 18-Jun-2007From: Hannah Morales < hannah(a)linguistlist.org >Subject: Wikipedia Volunteers-------------------------Message 1 ----------------------------------Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 12:49:35From: Hannah Morales < hannah(a)linguistlist.org >Subject: Wikipedia VolunteersDear subscribers,As you may recall, one of our Fund Drive 2007 campaigns was called the"Wikipedia Update Vote." We asked our viewers to consider earmarking theirdonations to organize an update project on linguistics entries in theEnglish-language Wikipedia. You can find more background information on thisat:http://linguistlist.org/donation/fund-drive2007/wikipedia/index.cfm.The speed with which we met our goal, thanks to the interest and generosityofour readers, was a sure sign that the linguistics community was enthusiasticabout the idea. Now that summer is upon us, and some of you may have a bitmoreleisure time, we are hoping that you will be able to help us get started ontheWikipedia project. The LINGUIST List's role in this project is a purelyorganizational one. We will:*Help, with your input, to identify major gaps in the Wikipedia materials orpages that need improvement;*Compile a list of linguistics pages that Wikipedia editors have identifiedas"in need of attention from an expert on the subject" or " does not cite anyreferences or sources," etc;*Send out periodical calls for volunteer contributors on specific topics orarticles;*Provide simple instructions on how to upload your entries into Wikipedia;*Keep track of our project Wikipedians;*Keep track of revisions and new entries;*Work with Wikimedia Foundation to publicize the linguistics community'sefforts.We hope you are as enthusiastic about this effort as we are. Just to help usallget started looking at Wikipedia more critically, and to easily identify anareaneeding improvement, we suggest that you take a look at the List ofLinguistspage at:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_linguists. MMany people are not listed there; others need to have more facts andinformationadded. If you would like to participate in this exciting update effort,pleaserespond by sending an email to LINGUIST Editor Hannah Morales athannah(a)linguistlist.org, suggesting what your role might be or whichlinguisticsentries you feel should be updated or added. Some linguists who saw ourcampaignon the Internet have already written us with specific suggestions, which wewillshare with you soon.This update project will take major time and effort on all our parts. Theendresult will be a much richer internet resource of information on the breadthanddepth of the field of linguistics. Our efforts should also stimulateprospectivestudents to consider studying linguistics and to educate a wider public onwhatwe do. Please consider participating.Sincerely,Hannah MoralesEditor, Wikipedia Update ProjectLinguistic Field(s): Not Applicable-----------------------------------------------------------LINGUIST List: Vol-18-1831
3 2
0 0

05 Jan '13
Hi folks,a quick update on the launch of a travel project under the WMFumbrella, and the import of the existing Wikivoyage site.* The name of the new site will bewikivoyage.org, per community vote.Language domains will live at (foo).wikivoyage.org.* A mailing list has been set up athttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikivoyage-l* We're not planning to import "Wikivoyage Shared" (which is a mediarepository similar to Commons) and are encouraging the community tohelp with transferring appropriately licensed files to WikimediaCommons.* The Wikivoyage Association is currently finalizing details of adomain name transfer with WMF. They have also recently securedwikivoyage.com.* The technical launch team at WMF consists of Chris Steipp, DanielZahn, Sam Reed, Matthias Mullie, and myself. Everyone is encouraged tohelp. Technical updates will be posted tohttps://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikivoyage_migration and related pages.We're using #wikimedia-wikivoyage onirc.freenode.net to coordinate,so feel free to join us there any time and use it for other relatedissues.* We've received a tarball of extensions running on the Wikivoyagesites, have imported them into Wikimedia's Git repo, and are currentlyreviewing them and making changes where needed to ensure they're readyfor WMF. Seehttps://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikivoyage_migration/Extensionsfor a list of extensions if you want to help (and feel free to commenton the priorities suggested by the Wikivoyage folks)We may not be able to deploy all extensions; we're using the two weektime-box for the launch as the main forcing function.* The hairiest part is to properly migrate user accounts. We can onlymigrate with users' permission, so Wikivoyage will kick off an opt-inprocess shortly to ask users to consent to transferring their privateaccount data. On the WMF side, we have to reconcile account names withexisting ones and require renames if necessary.We'll set up an initially private test instance in Labs and iterateover it with a (possibly reduced) content import, to ensure that allthe tricky legal bits (e.g. attribution) are handled correctly. Thenwe'll set up the production cluster wikis.* Our goal is to go live by the end of this month. That might slipdepending on the domain name transfer and unexpected technical hurdlesor emergencies on the WMF side. We will aim to minimize downtime forcurrent users, and to ensure that the old sites can be available inread-only mode for a little while longer to make it possible tocompare site behavior.Let me know if you have any questions about the process. :-)All best,Erik-- Erik MöllerVP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia FoundationSupport Free Knowledge:https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
21 50
0 0
Russian Wikipedia goes on strike
by abi yoyo 02 Dec '12

02 Dec '12
Tim Starling wrote:> According to ru.wp Arbcom member DR, the danger to Wikipedia was> overstated, and the text of the proposed law was misrepresented.I think that the interpretation to the bill given by DR is incorrect. In fact the proposed bill was not only about child pornography and extremism, but also about drugs and,  about “information, prompting children to commit actions, making threat to their life and health”. That was a very loose clause, that could ban virtually anything. After the blackout this clause was removed from the bill and it is a clear achievement of the strike. On the other hand the final version of the bill contains another clause, that is even more hazardous to us. It is about “information of methods of producing and use of narcotic substances, … of methods and places of cultivation of narcotic plants”. We do have information of drug synthesis on Wikipedia, ways of its use (e.g. marijuana) and we do have thorough instructions of marijuana cultivation on wikibooks. That is why our achievements are ambiguous. On the one hand we have a removal of a loose clause about information harmful to children, but on the otherwe now have another clause that is even more dangerous. That is why we are still trying to do what we can via our contacts within the authorities to revise the passed bill.But that is not all. The most important issue is extremism. According to the bill, the materials, that are banned for distribution in Russia should be included to the register of banned information on the ground of the court decision, banning the distribution of that information in Russia. We already have such court decisions and a list of extremist materials, distribution of which is prohibited in Russia. That list contains some really nasty materials, as e.g. nazi propaganda, but also Islamic texts (including those of famous non-terrorist Islamic authors e.g. Said Nursî), Saentologist, Jehova’s witnesses , Falun Gong, letters and materials of opposition in Russia, works of contemporary art, etc.We *do have* banned extremist materials in Wikipedia. E.g. this image:http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Файл:Александр_Савко_Путешествия_Микки_Мауса_п… искусства.jpegis considered extremist and is banned for distribution in Russia. (Hopefully it was uploaded two years before it was regulated as banned by the court).This letter in wikisource is also considered extremist:http://ru.wikisource.org/wiki/Всем,_кто_сочувствует_жертвам_бесланского_тер…!This is enough for banning the IPs of Wikimedia projects in Russia. And I am really afraid of this.I guess DR is aware of discussion on this list, but anyway I will inform him of it. Maybe he has something to add.> According to Levg in his Arbcom application, again via Google> Translate, "It should be noted that there are no objective reasons for> such a 'sprint survey' did not exist, to discuss the bill on second> reading has been known since at least last Friday."That is our fault that we could not manage to get the information in time. The first hearing was on Friday, but the community and myself got to know about the problem only on Monday, 9th. What for me personally I haven’t read the news on the weekend (yes, it is bad, that I relaxed on the weekend and haven’t read the news), and I failed to get to know about the problem in time. I guess it is also true for others. If we start to organize on Friday, the result would be better. It is a fault, but anyway it was not a deliberate fault, as nobody has informed the community earlier.
7 9
0 0

20 Nov '12
Forwarding questions from Research-l with permission, with the hope that these will spark discussion here on Wikimedia-l.RJensen:"Comments: I have not seen any editor make actual use of the ArticleFeedback tool -- are there examples? Yes Wikipedians are very proudof their vast half-billion-person audience. However they do not ask"what features are most useful for a high school student or teacher/a university student/ etc""Pine:This is a very interesting question. What have been the benefits of AFT5? I have seen complaints about spam and suppressible material being written in AFT5. What benefits has it had?Thanks,Pine
9 14
0 0
2012 Editor survey launched
by Tilman Bayer 07 Nov '12

07 Nov '12
Hi all,we have just launched the Foundation's 2012 editor survey; withinvitations to participate being shown to logged-in users on Wikipediaand Commons.A few quick facts about the survey (for more refer tohttps://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_Editor_Survey_2012):* This is the third survey of editors as envisaged in the Foundation's2010-15 strategic plan "in order to take the pulse of the communityand identify pressing issues or concerns", after the April 2011 andDecember 2011 surveys.* The first main purpose of this survey is to continue the work of the2011 studies (conducted by Mani Pande and Ayush Khanna), with a focuson tracking changes since last year and identifying trends.Which is why many questions are being repeated from last time.* The second emphasis in this instance of the survey is to measure thesatisfaction of the editing community with the work of the WikimediaFoundation.* This is the first editor survey that includes a non-Wikipediaproject (Commons, for the questions that are non Wikipedia-specific).* Thanks to everyone who commented on the draft questionnaire after wesolicited feedback on this list and in and IRC office hour, as well asto those who commented about the last survey. We made several changesbased on the feedback, and tried to reply to all concerns.* Also many thanks to all volunteer translators who reviewed orcontributed translations; the questionnaire is available in 14languages (Italian, Polish and Portuguese will launch a bit later).* As with the previous two surveys, the results will be published inthe following forms: A "topline" report detailing the percentage ofresponses for each question, a series of posts onhttps://blog.wikimedia.org analyzing the results, and a data setconsisting of anonymized responses which others can use to do theirown analyses. This time we will also aim to produce language-specifictopline reports (an approach we already tested for Chinese with thedata from the December 2011 survey).-- Tilman BayerSenior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications)Wikimedia FoundationIRC (Freenode): HaeB
4 6
0 0
next Wikidata office hours
by Lydia Pintscher 06 Nov '12

06 Nov '12
Heya folks :)Denny and I will be doing another round of Wikidata office hours. Youcan come and ask your questions about Wikidata - technical andnon-technical. The next ones will be:* 5. November at 17:30 UTC(http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?hour=17&min=30&sec=0&d…)in German* 6. November at 17:30 UTC(http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?hour=17&min=30&sec=0&d…)in EnglishBoth of them will happen on IRC in #wikimedia-office on freenode. Logswill be published afterwards for everyone who can't attend.I hope to see many of you there.CheersLydiaPS: Don't forget the Wikidata Main Page design that needs your hand:http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikidata-l/2012-October/001104.html;-)-- Lydia Pintscher -http://about.me/lydia.pintscherCommunity Communications for WikidataWikimedia Deutschland e.V.Obentrautstr. 7210963 Berlinwww.wikimedia.deWikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburgunter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch dasFinanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
3 3
0 0

02 Nov '12
Hi folks,I'm pleased to announced that the next WMF metrics and activitiesmeeting is going to be the first one that'll be live-streamed onYouTube with an open IRC backchannel.The meeting will take place November 1, 2012 at 5:30 PM UTC. The IRCchannel is #wikimedia-metrics-meetings [1] onirc.freenode.net.The current structure of the meeting is:* Review of key metrics including the monthly report card, but alsospecialized reports and analytics* Review of financials* Welcoming recent hires* Brief presentations on recent projects, with a focus on highestpriority initiatives* Update and Q&A with the Executive Director, if availablePlease reviewhttps://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetingsfor further information about how to participate.We'll post IRC logs and the video recording publicly after the meeting.All best,Erik[1] I'm open to just using #wikimedia or another channel if folkswould prefer that, but didn't want to assume that it's OK to hog thechannel :)-- Erik MöllerVP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia FoundationSupport Free Knowledge:https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
6 7
0 0

31 Oct '12
Here’s a news article that may be of interest to those who follow Wikimedia-related legal issues especially regarding BLPs.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20153309Pine
1 0
0 0
I agree with Denny’s point about COIs in this discussion, and I believe that the same issue has been raised regarding the FDC. I find it helpful when people who have financial interests or other potential COIs disclose that information in their statements on that Meta page and/or in Wikimedia-l depending on where they make their comments, and I would be in favor of a policy requiring that potential conflicts of interest be disclosed in a situation like this. These potential COIs include being a staff member of WMF whose budget or employment would be affected positively or negatively by these proposed changes.In my own case, I'm not a fellow or aspiring fellow, chapter executive, paid researcher, or WMF staff person whose department would be affected by these proposed changes, so I believe that as far as my own comments are concerned, I can speak without a financial interest in the outcome of the discussion.If we operate by consensus instead of by mere vote-counting, and if editors and WMF staff participate in good faith, then hopefully there will be enough balancing and give-and-take negotiation among those with COIs for a supermajority consensus to solidify. The other option is to ask for people who don’t have potential COIs to make a decision based on the opinions and information provided by others. However, this may all be a moot issue since it appears to me that Sue, a few of her chosen associates, and the Board apparently intend to make decisions themselves, so the community discussion on that Meta talk page will be used for discussion but not for finalizing a decision. Someone please correct me if I’m mistaken.Pine
3 2
0 0
Results per page:
[8]ページ先頭
©2009-2026 Movatter.jp