Don't bite the newbies: how reverts affect the quantity and quality of Wikipedia work

@inproceedings{Halfaker2011DontBT,
  title={Don't bite the newbies: how reverts affect the quantity and quality of Wikipedia work},
  author={Aaron Halfaker and Aniket Kittur and John Riedl},
  booktitle={Int. Sym. Wikis},
  year={2011}
}
Reverts are important to maintaining the quality of Wikipedia. They fix mistakes, repair vandalism, and help enforce policy. However, reverts can also be damaging, especially to the aspiring editor whose work they destroy. In this research we analyze 400,000 Wikipedia revisions to understand the effect that reverts had on editors. We seek to understand the extent to which they demotivate users, reducing the workforce of contributors, versus the extent to which they help users improve as… 

Figures and Tables from this paper

Etiquette in Wikipedia: weening new editors into productive ones

TLDR
The experimental results suggest that substantial gains in newcomer participation can be attained through inexpensive changes to the wording of the first normative message that new contributors receive, and one of the most prolific of these quality control tools (Huggle) is evaluated.

Learning from history: predicting reverted work at the word level in wikipedia

TLDR
A machine learning model is presented for predicting whether a contribution will be reverted based on word level features, which can make accurate predictions based only on the words a contribution changes.

Wikipedia Editor Drop-Off

While there is extensive literature both on the motivations of Wikipedia’s editors and on newcomers’ retention, less is known about the process by which experienced editors leave. In this paper, we

Accept, decline, postpone: How newcomer productivity is reduced in English Wikipedia by pre-publication review

TLDR
It is shown how the process's pre-publication review, which is intended to improve the success of newcomers, in fact decreases newcomer productivity in English Wikipedia and offers recommendations for system designers.

The Evolution of Power and Standard Wikidata Editors: Comparing Editing Behavior over Time to Predict Lifespan and Volume of Edits

TLDR
This paper investigates the evolution that editors with different levels of engagement exhibit in their editing behaviour over time, and defines and implements prediction models that use the multiple evolution indicators.

Spatio-Temporal Analysis of Reverted Wikipedia Edits

TLDR
Analysis of vandalism and damage in Wikipedia with regard to the time it is conducted and the country it originates from reveals significant differences for vandalism activities during the day, and for different days of the week, seasons, countries of origin, as well as Wikipedia’s languages.

Is It Good to Be Like Wikipedia?: Exploring the Trade-offs of Introducing Collaborative Editing Model to Q&A Sites

TLDR
By examining five years' archival data of Stack Overflow, it is found that the benefits of collaborative editing outweigh its risks and has implications for understanding and designing large-scale social computing systems.

The Risks, Benefits, and Consequences of Prepublication Moderation: Evidence from 17 Wikipedia Language Editions

Many online communities rely on postpublication moderation where contributors—even those that are perceived as being risky—are allowed to publish material immediately and where moderation takes place

Automated decision support for human tasks in a collaborative system: the case of deletion in Wikipedia

TLDR
It is proposed to deploy a system utilizing a model utilizing this model on Wikipedia as a set of decision-support tools to help article creators evaluate and improve their articles before posting, and new article patrollers make more informed decisions about which articles to delete and which to improve.

You Shall Not Publish: Edit Filters on English Wikipedia

TLDR
The role of edit filters is described, how they work, how the community governs their creation and maintenance, and how the tasks these filters take over are looked into.
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 28 REFERENCES

Creating, destroying, and restoring value in wikipedia

TLDR
The notion of the impact of an edit, measured by the number of times the edited version is viewed, is introduced, and it is shown that an overwhelming majority of the viewed words were written by frequent editors and that this majority is increasing.

Us vs. Them: Understanding Social Dynamics in Wikipedia with Revert Graph Visualizations

TLDR
Revert Graph is constructed, a tool that visualizes the overall conflict patterns between groups of users and enables visual analysis of opinion groups and rapid interactive exploration of those relationships via detail drill- downs.

Harnessing the wisdom of crowds in wikipedia: quality through coordination

TLDR
Examination of how the number of editors in Wikipedia and the coordination methods they use affect article quality demonstrated the critical importance of coordination in effectively harnessing the "wisdom of the crowd" in online production environments.

rv you're dumb: identifying discarded work in Wiki article history

TLDR
Methods for detecting when a revision discards the work of one or more other revisions, a means of visualizing these relationships in-line with existing history views, and a computational method for detecting discarded work are presented.

The singularity is not near: slowing growth of Wikipedia

TLDR
It is shown that recent editing activity suggests that Wikipedia growth has slowed, and perhaps plateaued, indicating that it may have come against its limits to growth.

Extracting Trust from Domain Analysis: A Case Study on the Wikipedia Project

TLDR
This evaluation, conducted on about 8,000 articles representing 65% of the overall Wikipedia editing activity, shows that the new trust evidence that is extracted from Wikipedia allows us to transparently and automatically compute trust values to isolate articles of great or low quality.

The work of sustaining order in wikipedia: the banning of a vandal

TLDR
This paper analyzes "vandal fighting" as an epistemic process of distributed cognition, highlighting the role of non-human actors in enabling a decentralized activity of collective intelligence in Wikipedia.

A jury of your peers: quality, experience and ownership in Wikipedia

TLDR
The role that the quality of the contributions, the experience of the contributors and the ownership of the content play in the decisions over which contributions become part of Wikipedia and which ones are rejected by the community is examined.

A content-driven reputation system for the wikipedia

TLDR
The results show that the notion of reputation has good predictive value: changes performed by low-reputation authors have a significantly larger than average probability of having poor quality, as judged by human observers, and of being later undone, as measured by the algorithms.

Socialization tactics in wikipedia and their effects

Socialization of newcomers is critical both for conventional groups. It helps groups perform effectively and the newcomers develop commitment. However, little empirical research has investigated the