To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Wikipedia citations.
Journal articles on the topic 'Wikipedia citations'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Wikipedia citations.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Singh, Harshdeep, Robert West, and Giovanni Colavizza. "Wikipedia citations: A comprehensive data set of citations with identifiers extracted from English Wikipedia." Quantitative Science Studies 2, no. 1 (2021): 1–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00105.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Wikipedia’s content is 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 data set of citations extracted from Wikipedia. We extracted29.3 million citations from 6.1 million English Wikipedia articles as of May 2020, and classified as being books, journal articles, or Web content. We were thus able to extract 4.0 million citations to scholarly publications with known identifiers—including DOI, PMC, PMID, and ISBN—and further equip an extra 261 thousand 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 data set in the future.
2
Piccardi, T., R. West, M. Redi, and G. Colavizza. "Quantifying Engagement with Citations on Wikipedia. (Part 2) (The translation and original text of the article are presented)." Scientific and Technical Libraries, no. 10 (December 8, 2020): 63–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.33186/1027-3689-2020-10-63-76.
Full textAbstract:
Wikipedia is one of the most visited sites on the Web and a common source of information for many users. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia was not conceived as a source of original information, but as a gateway to secondary sources: according to Wikipedia’s guidelines, facts must be backed up by reliable sources that reflect the full spectrum of views on the topic. Although citations lie at the heart of Wikipedia, little is known about how users interact with them. To close this gap, we built client-side instrumentation for logging all interactions with links leading from English Wikipedia articles to cited references during one month, and conducted the first analysis of readers’ interactions with citations. We find that overall engagement with citations is low: about one in 300 page views results in a reference click (0,29% overall; 0,56% on desktop; 0,13% on mobile). Matched observational studies of the factors associated with reference clicking reveal that clicks occur more frequently on shorter pages and on pages of lower quality, suggesting that references are consulted more commonly when Wikipedia itself does not contain the information sought by the user. Moreover, we observe that recent content, open access sources, and references about life events (births, deaths, marriages, etc.) are particularly popular. Taken together, our findings deepen our understanding of Wikipedia’s role in a global information economy where reliability is ever less certain, and source attribution ever more vital.
3
Colavizza, Giovanni. "COVID-19 research in Wikipedia." Quantitative Science Studies 1, no. 4 (December 2020): 1349–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00080.
Full textAbstract:
Wikipedia is one of the main sources of free knowledge on the Web. During the first few months of the pandemic, over 5,200 new Wikipedia pages on COVID-19 were created, accumulating over 400 million page views by mid-June 2020. 1 At the same time, an unprecedented amount of scientific articles on COVID-19 and the ongoing pandemic have been published online. Wikipedia’s content is based on reliable sources, such as scientific literature. Given its public function, it is crucial for Wikipedia to rely on representative and reliable scientific results, especially in a time of crisis. We assess the coverage of COVID-19-related research in Wikipedia via citations to a corpus of over 160,000 articles. We find that Wikipedia editors are integrating new research at a fast pace, and have cited close to 2% of the COVID-19 literature under consideration. While doing so, they are able to provide a representative coverage of COVID-19-related research. We show that all the main topics discussed in this literature are proportionally represented from Wikipedia, after accounting for article-level effects. We further use regression analyses to model citations from Wikipedia and show that Wikipedia editors on average rely on literature that is highly cited, widely shared on social media, and peer-reviewed.
4
Włodarczyk, Bartłomiej. "What Does “a Reliable Source” Mean?" Zagadnienia Informacji Naukowej - Studia Informacyjne 58, no. 2(116) (December 30, 2020): 44–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.36702/zin.712.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose/Thesis: The paper aims to describe the types and structure of references to different sources as cited by the selected Polish Wikipedia articles from the category of people related to the Austrian Partition and all the categories below.
Approach/Methods: The research data consisted of references from 50 randomly selected articles from Polish Wikipedia, including 1007 citations and 758 references. The references have been gathered, processed, and analyzed mainly employing R language. They have been categorized, and then the descriptive statistics for the chosen elements have been provided and analyzed.
Results and conclusions: The study shows that the majority of sources used in the research sample were of primary nature. Consequently, it demonstrates that the analyzed articles about historical persons can be regarded more as a product of research than simple imitative work to a certain extent. Polish Wikipedians mainly utilized government directories and newspaper or magazine articles, often from digital libraries. Secondary sources, on the other hand, chiefly consisted of books, webpages, and book sections. The structure of references was diverse, and bibliographic descriptions sometimes lacked important elements. The findings confirm difficulties in analyzing sources in Wikipedia. Moreover, they support the need for researching different editions and subject areas of the largest online encyclopedia.
Research limitations: Due to the exploratory character of research, which focuses on references from selected articles about historical persons from Poland, one should not readily extrapolate its results to other parts of Polish Wikipedia. The research sample only comprised citations and references, which were collected at one specific point of time. Additionally, the categorization of references has been done by a single researcher, and intercoder reliability has not been checked.
Originality/Value: Most of the studies into sources used in Wikipedia articles have been limited to its English edition so far. Moreover, articles about historical persons in this encyclopedia have not been analyzed from the perspective of utilized sources, their types, and reference patterns. The paper broadens the understanding of sources usage in Wikipedia by focusing on the Polish edition of the encyclopedia.
5
Piccardi, Tiziano, Robert West, Miriam Redi, and Giovanni Colavizza. "Quantifying Engagement with Citations on Wikipedia. (Part 1)." Scientific and Technical Libraries 1, no. 9 (October 30, 2020): 95–120. http://dx.doi.org/10.33186/1027-3689-2020-9-95-108.
Full textAbstract:
Википедия является одним из самых посещаемых сайтов в интернете и распространённым источником информации для многих пользователей. В качестве энциклопедии Википедия задумывалась не как источник оригинальной (окончательной) научной информации, а, скорее, как ворота к более глубоким и точным источникам. В соответствии с базовыми принципами Википедии факты должны быть подкреплены надёжными источниками, которые отражают полный спектр всех мнений по данной теме. Хотя цитаты лежат в основе функционирования Википедии, пока мало что известно о том, как пользователи работают с ними. Чтобы закрыть этот пробел, мы создали клиентские (пользовательские) инструменты для ведения записей (журналов) всех взаимодействий со ссылками, идущими из англоязычных статей Википедии на цитируемые ссылки в течение одного месяца, и провели первый анализ взаимодействия читателей с цитатами.Результаты показывают, что в целом вовлечённость в цитаты низкая. Около 300 просмотров страниц приводят к входу на одну ссылку – это составляет всего 0,29%, в том числе 0,56% при работе с настольным компьютером (на рабочем столе) и 0,13% при работе на мобильных устройствах. Сопоставление факторов, связанных с переходами по ссылке, показывает, что переходы происходят чаще на более коротких страницах и на страницах относительно низкого качества. Исходя из этого можно предположить, что ссылки чаще всего требуются, когда Википедия не содержит информацию, которую ищет пользователь. Кроме того, мы обратили внимание, что источники открытого доступа и ссылки о жизненных событиях (рождения, смерти, браки и т.д.) особенно популярны.Собранные воедино, наши выводы углубляют понимание роли Википедии в глобальной информационной экономике, где надёжность становится всё менее определённой, а значение источников становится всё более важным.Справочный формат ACM для ссылок: Тициано Пиккарди, Мириам Реди, Джованни Колавицца и Роберт Вест. 2020.Количественная оценка взаимодействия с цитатами в Википедии. В трудах: Веб-конференция 2020 (WWW’20), 20–24 апр. 2020 г., Тайбэй, Тай-вань. ACM, Нью-Йорк, штат Нью-Йорк, США. 12 стр. https://doi.org/10.1145/3366423.3380300.
6
Kantarovich, Diana, Hanna B. Vollbrecht, Sebastian A. Cruz, Hector Castillo, Cody S. Lee, Josef Kushner, Jim X. Leng, Vince K. Morgan, and Kevin M. Hellman. "Wikipedia: A Medical Student Educational Project to Edit Wikipedia in Preparation for Practicing Evidence-Based Pain Medicine." Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development 7 (January 2020): 238212052095969. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2382120520959691.
Full textAbstract:
Objective: Wikipedia is commonly used to acquire information about various medical conditions such as chronic pain. Ideally, better online pain management content could reduce the burden of opioid use disorders. Our goal was to improve the quality of the content available on Wikipedia to make it more accurate and applicable to medical students and the general public while training medical students to practice evidence-based medicine and critically assess their sources of information. Methods: An elective class in Neuroscience, Pain, and Opioids composed of 10 medical students met biweekly to discuss landmark and practice-changing research articles in the fields of acute pain, chronic pain, and opioid management. The professor chose Wikipedia articles relevant to this course. Three independent viewers analyzed the quality of citations, anecdotal medical content, and content value for both patients and medical professionals. As part of their coursework, students then edited the Wikipedia articles. Results: Although some of the Wikipedia pain topic content (6.7% ± 2.0) was anecdotal, financially biased, or inconsistent with Western Medical Practice content, overall articles included primarily high-quality citations (85.6% ± 3.1). On a 0-5 Likert scale, students felt content would be moderately helpful for both medical students/professionals (3.4 ± 0.2) and laypersons (3.5 ± 0.2). Editing and adding citations was feasible, but novel material was often reverted. Conclusion: A significant amount of pain medicine content was relevant and amenable to student editing. Therefore, future use of this tactic could provide a unique opportunity to integrate evidence-based medicine into the medical curriculum and have a direct impact on the widely available medical information. Future refinement in the editorial process may also further improve online information.
7
Shim, Wonsik, Jeayeon Byun, and Minjung Kim. "Analysis of Wikipedia Citations in Peer-Reviewed Journal Articles." Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science 47, no. 2 (May 30, 2013): 247–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.4275/kslis.2013.47.2.247.
Full text
8
Tomaszewski, Robert, and Karen I. MacDonald. "A Study of Citations to Wikipedia in Scholarly Publications." Science & Technology Libraries 35, no. 3 (July 2, 2016): 246–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0194262x.2016.1206052.
Full text
9
Zemskov, Andrey. "Opportunities for Academic and Research Libraries and Wikipedia." Scientific and Technical Libraries, no. 8 (August 1, 2017): 65–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.33186/1027-3689-2017-8-65-80.
Full textAbstract:
Wikipedia supplements library resources with timely, useful information; acts as a tool for librarians answering reference questions; provides a pathway to primary and secondary sources and citations. Wikipedia helps library clients perform research; and provides a vital platform for recording local knowledge. Public libraries can expose both their staff and patrons to more complex and sophisticated strategies for dealing with the changing digital landscape. Wikipedia has the potential to point clients to libraries, where resources in their areas of interest can be found. Wikipedia-library engagement connects Wikipedia with the important role libraries play in bridging inequalities in access to information. Active collaborations between Wikipedia editors and academic and research libraries to advance the free flow of information which supporting sustainable development around the world. These collaborative opportunities offer a range of outcomes that could benefit academic and research libraries including crowdsourcing, community engagement, rapid models for online publishing, student writing assignments, etc. For the Russian National Public Library for Science and Technology both projects are equally of interest. (http://2016.ifla.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2016/08/112-IFLAWikipediaAcademicandResearchLibrariesDiscussioDRAFT.pdf)
10
Zemskov, Andrey. "Opportunities for Public, Academic and Research Libraries and Wikipedia. Part 1." Scientific and Technical Libraries, no. 7 (July 1, 2017): 30–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.33186/1027-3689-2017-7-30-41.
Full textAbstract:
Several libraries and Wikipedia agreed on developing cooperation. This initiative has been translated into two Public Projects presented at Session 112. Library engagement and Wikipedia during IFLA General Conference (August 13-19, Columbus, USA). Wikipedia supplements library resources with timely, useful information; acts as a tool for librarians answering reference questions; provides a pathway to primary and secondary sources and citations. Wikipedia helps library clients perform research; and provides a vital platform for recording local knowledge. Public libraries can expose both their staff and patrons to more complex and sophisticated strategies for dealing with the changing digital landscape. Wikipedia has the potential to point clients to libraries, where resources in their areas of interest can be found. Wikipedia-library engagement connects Wikipedia with the important role libraries play in bridging inequalities in access to information. Active collaborations between Wikipedia editors and academic and research libraries to advance the free flow of information which supporting sustainable development around the world. These collaborative opportunities offer a range of outcomes that could benefit academic and research libraries including crowdsourcing, community engagement, rapid models for online publishing, student writing assignments, etc. For the Russian National Public Library for Science and Technology both projects are equally of interest.
11
Joorabchi, Arash, Cailbhe Doherty, and Jennifer Dawson. "‘WP2Cochrane’, a tool linking Wikipedia to the Cochrane Library: Results of a bibliometric analysis evaluating article quality and importance." Health Informatics Journal 26, no. 3 (December 23, 2019): 1881–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1460458219892711.
Full textAbstract:
Medical information on English Wikipedia was accessed over 2 billion times in 2018. Our goal was to develop an automated system to assist Wikipedia volunteers to improve articles with high-quality sources from journals such as The Cochrane Library. We created an automated indexing system by linking available reviews from the Cochrane library with disease-related Wikipedia articles and evaluating the relationship between the quality and importance of these articles with the number of relevant and cited Cochrane reviews. We first conducted a bibliometric analysis, identifying disease-related Wikipedia articles and relevant/cited Cochrane reviews. Citations were thematically coded, and descriptive statistics were calculated. Finally, separate multinomial logistic regression analyses were conducted for article quality and importance. The indexing system identified 4381 disease-related Wikipedia articles, 1193 (27%) of which cited a Cochrane review. Higher quality Wikipedia articles were more likely to cite a Cochrane review (p = 0.002), while lower quality articles were less likely to cite a Cochrane review (p < 0.0005). A greater number of Cochrane reviews are available for more ‘important’ Wikipedia articles (p < 0.005), and these articles were more likely to cite a Cochrane review (p < 0.005). This approach to an indexing system can be leveraged by Wikipedia contributors and editors seeking to update disease-related Wikipedia articles with relevant Cochrane reviews (thus improving their quality), and online information seekers in need of additional information to supplement their Wikipedia search.
12
Maggio, Lauren A., John M. Willinsky, Ryan M. Steinberg, Daniel Mietchen, Joseph L. Wass, and Ting Dong. "Wikipedia as a gateway to biomedical research: The relative distribution and use of citations in the English Wikipedia." PLOS ONE 12, no. 12 (December 21, 2017): e0190046. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190046.
Full text
13
Azer, Samy A. "Is Wikipedia a reliable learning resource for medical students? Evaluating respiratory topics." Advances in Physiology Education 39, no. 1 (March 2015): 5–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/advan.00110.2014.
Full textAbstract:
The aim of the present study was to critically evaluate the accuracy and readability of English Wikipedia articles on the respiratory system and its disorders and whether they can be a suitable resource for medical students. On April 27, 2014, English Wikipedia was searched for articles on respiratory topics. Using a modified DISCERN instrument, articles were independently scored by three assessors. The scoring targeted content accuracy, frequency of updating, and quality of references. The readability of articles was measured using two other instruments. The mean DISCERN score for the 40 articles identified was 26.4 ± 6.3. Most articles covered causes, signs and symptoms, prevention, and treatment. However, several knowledge deficiencies in the pathogenesis of diseases, investigations needed, and treatment were observed. The total number of references for the 40 articles was 1,654, and the references varied from 0 to 168 references, but several problems were identified in the list of references and citations made. The readability of articles was in the range of 9.4 ± 1.8 to 22.6 ± 10.7 using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level instrument and 10.0 ± 2.6 to 19.6 ± 8.3 using the Readability Coleman-Liau index. A strong correlation was found between the two instruments ( r2= 0.744, P < 0.001). The agreement between the assessors had mean κ scores in the range of 0.712–0.857. In conclusion, despite the effort placed in creating Wikipedia respiratory articles by anonymous volunteers (wikipedians), most articles had knowledge deficiencies, were not accurate, and were not suitable for medical students as learning resources.
14
Heydari, Shabnam, Maryam Shekofteh, and Maryam Kazerani. "Relationship between Altmetrics and Citations A Study on the Highly Cited Research Papers." DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology 39, no. 4 (July 15, 2019): 169–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.14429/djlit.39.4.14204.
Full textAbstract:
The present study aims to assess highly cited articles using altmetrics and citations and identify the relationship between them. The statistical population consists of all the highly cited articles on surgery indexed on the Web of Science. The number of article citations was measured using the Web of Science and the altmetric score of the articles using the Altmetric Bookmarklet. The analysis of the data was carried out using descriptive statistics and Spearman’s correlation coefficient. Of the 1077 highly cited surgery articles, 62.74 per cent had an altmetric score. The highest number of received citations was 1787, and the highest altmetric score was 2019. A positive and significant correlation was observed between the number of citations and the policy-making documents, Wikipedia citations and CiteULike (P<0.001). A positive but non-significant correlation was also observed between the number of citations and the number of Mendeley readers (r=0.02, P>0.05). A poor, negative and significant correlations were observed between the number of citations and the overall altmetric score of the highly cited surgery articles (r=-0.235, P<0.001). The findings may be due to the different pattern of using social media by the surgery researchers compared to the researchers of other fields. Altmetrics can only be used to complement citations and not replace them.
15
Kousha, Kayvan, and Mike Thelwall. "Are wikipedia citations important evidence of the impact of scholarly articles and books?" Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 68, no. 3 (June 13, 2016): 762–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.23694.
Full text
16
Kousha, Kayvan, and Mike Thelwall. "News stories as evidence for research? BBC citations from articles, Books, and Wikipedia." Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 68, no. 8 (June 5, 2017): 2017–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.23862.
Full text
17
Page, Ruth. "Counter narratives and controversial crimes: The Wikipedia article for the ‘Murder of Meredith Kercher’." Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 23, no. 1 (February 2014): 61–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0963947013510648.
Full textAbstract:
Narrative theorists have long recognised that narrative is a selective mode of representation. There is always more than one way to tell a story, which may alter according to its teller, audience and the social or historical context in which the story is told. But multiple versions of the ‘same’ events are not always valued in the same way: some versions may become established as dominant accounts, whilst others may be marginalised or resist hegemony as counter narratives (Bamberg and Andrews, 2004). This essay explores the potential of Wikipedia as a site for positioning counter and dominant narratives. Through the analysis of linearity and tellership (Ochs and Capps, 2001) as exemplified through revisions of a particular article (‘Murder of Meredith Kercher’), I show how structural choices (open versus closed sequences) and tellership (single versus multiple narrators) function as mechanisms to prioritise different dominant narratives over time and across different cultural contexts. The case study points to the dynamic and relative nature of dominant and counter narratives. In the ‘Murder of Meredith Kercher’ article the counter narratives of the suspects’ guilt or innocence and their position as villains or victims depended on national context, and changed over time. The changes in the macro-social narratives are charted in the micro-linguistic analysis of structure, citations and quoted speech in four selected versions of the article, taken from the English and Italian Wikipedias.
18
Bould, M. D., E. S. Hladkowicz, A. A. E. Pigford, L. A. Ufholz, T. Postonogova, E. Shin, and S. Boet. "References that anyone can edit: review of Wikipedia citations in peer reviewed health science literature." BMJ 348, mar05 4 (March 6, 2014): g1585. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g1585.
Full text
19
Pooladian, Aida, and Ángel Borrego. "Methodological issues in measuring citations in Wikipedia: a case study in Library and Information Science." Scientometrics 113, no. 1 (July 27, 2017): 455–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2474-z.
Full text
20
Ouchi, Ali, Mohammad Karim Saberi, Nasim Ansari, Leila Hashempour, and Alireza Isfandyari-Moghaddam. "Do altmetrics correlate with citations? A study based on the 1,000 most-cited articles." Information Discovery and Delivery 47, no. 4 (November 18, 2019): 192–202. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/idd-07-2019-0050.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to study the presence of highly cited papers of Nature in social media websites and tools. It also tries to examine the correlation between altmetric and bibliometric indicators. Design/methodology/approach This descriptive study was carried out using altmetric indicators. The research sample consisted of 1,000 most-cited articles in Nature. In February 2019, the bibliographic information of these articles was extracted from the Scopus database. Then, the titles of all articles were manually searched on Google, and by referring to the article in the journal website and altmetric institution, the data related to social media presence and altmetric score of articles were collected. The data were analyzed using Microsoft Excel and SPSS. Findings According to the results of the study, from 1,000 articles, 989 of them (98.9 per cent) were mentioned at least once in different social media websites and tools. The most used altmetric source in highly cited articles was Mendeley (98.9 per cent), followed by Citeulike (79.8 per cent) and Wikipedia (69.4 per cent). Most Tweets, blog posts, Facebook posts, news stories, readers in Mendeley, Citeulike and Connotea and Wikipedia citations belonged to the article titled “Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search”. The highest altmetric score was 3,135 which belonged to this paper. Most tweeters and articles’ readers were from the USA. The membership type of the tweeters was public membership. In terms of fields of study, most readers were PhD students in Agricultural and Biological Sciences. Finally, the results of Spearman’s Correlation revealed positive significant statistical correlation between all altmetric indicators and received citations of highly cited articles (p-value = 0.0001). Practical implications The results of this study can help researchers, editors and editorial boards of journals better understand the importance and benefits of using social media and tools to publish articles. Originality/value Altmetrics is a relatively new field, and in particular, there are not many studies related to the presence of articles in various social media until now. Accordingly, in this study, a comprehensive altmetric analysis was carried out on 1000 most-cited articles of one of the world's most reliable journals.
21
Thelwall, Mike. "Does Astronomy research become too dated for the public? Wikipedia citations to Astronomy and Astrophysics journal articles 1996-2014." El Profesional de la Información 25, no. 6 (November 14, 2016): 893. http://dx.doi.org/10.3145/epi.2016.nov.06.
Full text
22
Kolahi, Jafar, Saber Khazaei, DavidG Dunning, and EdwardF Rossomando. "Do Open Access Dental Articles Enjoy Higher Altmetric Attention Scores, Twitter, Facebook, News, Wikipedia, Blog mentions, Mendeley Readers and Citations?" Dental Hypotheses 11, no. 1 (2020): 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/denthyp.denthyp_17_20.
Full text
23
Parrish, James M., Jonathan R. Kaplan, and Amiethab A. Aiyer. "A Decade of Social Media Influence on Foot and Ankle Literature." Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics 5, no. 4 (October 1, 2020): 2473011420S0037. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2473011420s00379.
Full textAbstract:
Category: Ankle; Ankle Arthritis; Arthroscopy; Basic Sciences/Biologics; Bunion; Diabetes; Hindfoot; Lesser Toes; Midfoot/Forefoot; Sports; Trauma; Other Introduction/Purpose: The topics, articles and discussions that arise within Foot and Ankle Orthopaedic literature are increasingly determined by their presence on social media outlets. The influence of social media mentions on Foot and Ankle Orthopaedic literature has not yet been investigated. The primary purpose of this study is to identify the social media outlets that were most associated with the Altmetric attention score (AAS). The secondary aim is to characterize the top 100 most highly cited articles within Foot and Ankle literature with the top 100 scoring Altmetric articles. Methods: We conducted a query of the Altmetric database for all journal titles containing the words ‘Foot’ and ‘Ankle.’ In accordance with other investigations, articles were only included after 2010, since this was beginning of academic social media participation. We assessed the frequency and percent of articles by journal, collecting variables including impact factor, AAS, along with average mentions within news, blogs, policy, patents, Twitter, peer review, Weibo, Facebook, Wikipedia, Google+, LinkedIn, Reddit, Pinterest, F1000, Q&A, online video, Syllabi, and traditional metrics such as number of Mendeley readers and citations (Table 1). We used a Spearman, semi-partial, and partial correlation test to detect the association between AAS and media outlet mentions, Mendeley readers or Dimensions citations. Finally, we ranked one article list with the 100 most popular articles on social media and one with the 100 most cited articles. Articles were examined for overlap, topic, article type, and level of evidence. Results: Our search returned 4,365 articles. Foot and Ankle International had the highest frequency of articles, though the Journal of Foot and Ankle Research had the highest AAS (Table 1). News and Twitter mentions had the greatest association with AAS. The top study designs for the AAS articles were prospective (n=35), retrospective (n=25), and systematic reviews (n=17), compared to the most highly cited articles which had retrospective (n=32), review (n=31), and observational studies (n=26) (p<0.001). When examining the top 100 highest AAS scoring articles with the 100 most cited, there was only one article in both groups. Compared to the most highly cited articles, the highest ranked AAS articles had a better average level of evidence (Cited: 3.4 vs. AAS: 2.9, p=0.001). Conclusion: Twitter and mentions within news are the most correlated with AAS. Although traditional metrics for article influence often reference an article’s citation count, attaining social media relevance is becoming more important than before. There is currently very little overlap among the most highly cited and the most mentioned articles on social media. Future research is needed to address whether citation counts or social media presence have more influence on actual clinical practice. [Table: see text]
24
Herzberg, Laura, and Harald Lüngen. "Types and annotation of reply relations in computer-mediated communication." European Journal of Applied Linguistics 7, no. 2 (September 2, 2019): 305–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2019-0006.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis paper presents types and annotation layers of reply relations in computer- mediated communication (CMC). Reply relations hold between post units in CMC interactions and describe references from one given post to a previous post. We classify three types of reply relations in CMC interactions: first, technical replies, i. e. the possibility to reply directly to a previous post by clicking a ‘reply’ button; second, indentations, e. g. in wiki talk pages in which users insert their contributions in the existing talk page by indenting them and third, interpretative reply relations, i. e. the reply action is not realised formally but signalled by other structural or linguistics means such as address markers ‘@’, greetings, citations and/or Q-A structures. We take a look at existing practices in the description and representation of such relations in corpora and examples of chat, Wikipedia talk pages, Twitter and blogs. We then provide an annotation proposal that combines the different levels of description and representation of reply relations and which adheres to the schemas and practices for encoding CMC corpus documents within the TEI framework as defined by the TEI CMC SIG. It constitutes a prerequisite for correctly identifying higher levels of interactional relations such as dialogue acts or discussion trees.
25
Стахов, Алексей Петрович. "МОЙ ПУТЬ В БОЛЬШУЮ НАУКУ." RADIOELECTRONIC AND COMPUTER SYSTEMS, no. 2 (June 21, 2019): 6–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.32620/reks.2019.2.01.
Full textAbstract:
The article is a summary of Alexey Stakhov scientific way, who in 1961 graduated from Radio Engineering Faculty Kharkiv Aviation Institute with honors and became the first graduate of the faculty who in 1972, at the age of 32, defended his doctoral thesis on the specialty “computer engineering” and in 1974 received academic title of professor in the department of information-measuring systems (Taganrog Radio Engineering Institute).From 1961 to 1963 he worked as an engineer at the famous space company “Design Bureau of Electrical Instrument Engineering” (now the firm “Khartron”). From 1963 to 1966 he studied in the graduate school of the Technical Cybernetics Department of the Kharkiv Institute of Radio Electronics under the supervision of Professor Alexander A. Volkov.In 1971, in connection with the completion of his doctoral thesis, Alexey Stakhov was elected to the post of the Head of Information-Measuring Technology Department of Taganrog Radio Engineering Institute (1971-1977).Alexey Stakhov became the first Soviet professor who in early 1976 was selected by the USSR Ministry of Education for a 2-month work at Vienna Technical University.At the final stage of his stay in Austria, A. P. Stakhov delivered the extensive lecture “Algorithmic Measurement Theory and the Foundations of Computer Arithmetic” at the joint meeting of Computer and Cybernetic Societies of Austria. With this lecture, international recognition of the Stakhov’s scientific direction began.The USSR Ambassador to Austria, Mikhail Efremov, sent the extensive letter to the USSR State Committee on Science and Technology with a proposal to patent Prof. Stakhov’s inventions abroad. The results of the patenting exceeded all expectations. The 65 patents, granted by the patent offices of the USA, Japan, England, France, Germany, Canada, and other countries protect the priority of the scientific direction, created by A.P. Stakhov.In more detail with the scientific achievements of Prof. A.P. Stakhov can be found by reading his biographical article in English Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexey_Stakhov and its page in google citation https://scholar.google.com.ua/citations?user=oDcIzrUAAAAJ&hl=uk.
26
Noč, Manca, and Maja Zumer. "The completeness of articles and citation in the Slovene Wikipedia." Program 48, no. 1 (January 28, 2014): 53–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/prog-12-2012-0069.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose – The purpose of this research was to examine the number and type of sources cited by featured articles from the Slovene Wikipedia with the purpose of assessing their quality. A sample of random articles was also procured in order to give a clearer picture of the content of the Slovene Wikipedia. Design/methodology/approach – A research was conducted on 122 featured articles from the Slovene Wikipedia from 2009, 2010 and 2011. The following aspects of the articles were analyzed: topic and originality of the article and number, language and type of sources cited. Findings – The results have shown that most of the featured articles are adapted from the English Wikipedia, the most common topics being science, sports and history. Based on these results the authors have concluded that despite some deficiencies the featured articles on the Slovene Wikipedia are of much higher quality compared to random articles. Research limitations/implications – The biggest research limitation is the ever changing nature of Wikipedia and its articles, which hinders the process of analyzing results and relying on these results to be relevant in the future. Originality/value – This is the first such research of the Slovene Wikipedia that deals specifically with citation analysis of featured articles. Results of this research offer valuable information to both editors of featured articles and users, as they point out certain deficiencies, which can be eliminated.
27
Alemu, Getaneh Agegn. "Development and Maintenance of The Ethiopian Legal Information Website." Afrika Focus 20, no. 1-2 (February 15, 2007): 185–200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2031356x-0200102008.
Full textAbstract:
Development and Maintenance of the Ethiopian Legal Information Website Information and Communication Technology in general and the internet in particular have been creating unprecedented opportunities in facilitating and streamlining access to information. Websites have become a common way of publishing legal information for the public in many countries. In Ethiopia, however, the availability of legal websites has been very limited or non-existent. Except for the constitution, no other basic Ethiopian law has ever been published online. To benefit from the tremendous potentials of the internet, a project was initiated to develop an Ethiopian Legal Information Web Site. Based on users' requirements obtained from questionnaire analysis, and current paradigms and implications, the Ethiopian Legal Information Website was designed, developed, implemented and maintained The website is an online database of Ethiopian basic laws developed by Mekelle University, Ethiopia, in cooperation with the Non-Western Law Department of Ghent University, Belgium. Basic laws included on the site at present are the Ethiopian Constitution, Civil Code, Criminal Code, Civil Procedure Code, Criminal Procedure Code, Commercial Code and Family Code. The laws can be viewed and used in full text html, whereas some of the laws including the 2004 Criminal Code, Family Code, FDRE Constitution and the Tigray Regional State Constitution are available in pdf Laws can be searched by keywords using the site search engine. Comments and suggestions from experts and Ethiopian laws users have been collected, hence modifications, improvements and additions have been made to the website. The Ethiopian Legal Information Website was first hosted on the University of Ghent internet server and currently in the Mekelle University server at http://mail.mu.edu.et/~ethiopialaws/ The Ethiopian Legal Information Website has been found to be a useful web portal to access and use the basic Ethiopian laws. The University of Ghent, !LO, the Library of Congress, AUSTLII, WASHLAW, WIKIPEDIA and other major legal web portals make citations in reference to the site. While the website currently contains only the basic laws of the federal government, an action plan is prepared to include regional laws of Ethiopia. Other legal information including amendments to the laws, decisions and legal news will also be included on the site, hence a comprehensive Ethiopian Legal Web Portal will be developed and maintained.
28
Rukundo, Solomon. "Wikipedia in the Courts: An examination of the citation of Wikipedia in judicial opinions in Uganda." Computer Law & Security Review 35, no. 5 (October 2019): 105316. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2019.03.010.
Full text
29
Wyatt, Sally, Anna Harris, and Susan E. Kelly. "Controversy goes online: Schizophrenia genetics on Wikipedia." Science & Technology Studies 29, no. 1 (February 12, 2016): 13–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.23987/sts.55407.
Full textAbstract:
Scientific controversy is increasingly played out via the internet, a technology that is simultaneously content, medium and research infrastructure. Here we analyse material from Wikipedia, focusing on schizophrenia genetics. We find that citation and curation of scientific resources follow a negotiated, ad hoc adherence to Wikipedia rules, are based on limited access to scientific literature, and thus lead to a partially constructed ‘review’ of the science that excludes non-professionals. Given its policies and systems for developing neutral, evidence-based articles, one would not expect to find controversy on Wikipedia, yet we find traces. Scientific ambiguity about schizophrenia genetics lends itself to multiple ways of curating resources, and the infrastructure of online spaces enables the practices behind curation work to become visible in new ways. We argue that not only does Wikipedia make scientific controversy visible to a wider range of people, it is also involved in the production of knowledge.
30
Koo, Malcolm. "Complementary and Alternative Medicine on Wikipedia: Opportunities for Improvement." Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine 2014 (2014): 1–4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/105186.
Full textAbstract:
Wikipedia, a free and collaborative Internet encyclopedia, has become one of the most popular sources of free information on the Internet. However, there have been concerns over the quality of online health information, particularly that on complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). This exploratory study aimed to evaluate several page attributes of articles on CAM in the English Wikipedia. A total of 97 articles were analyzed and compared with eight articles of broad categories of therapies in conventional medicine using the Mann-WhitneyUtest. Based on the Wikipedia editorial assessment grading, 4% of the articles attained “good article” status, 34% required considerable editing, and 56% needed substantial improvements in their content. The median daily access of the articles over the previous 90 days was 372 (range: 7–4,214). The median word count was 1840 with a readability of grade 12.7 (range: 9.4–17.7). Medians of word count and citation density of the CAM articles were significantly lower than those in the articles of conventional medicine therapies. In conclusion, despite its limitations, the general public will continue to access health information on Wikipedia. There are opportunities for health professionals to contribute their knowledge and to improve the accuracy and completeness of the CAM articles on Wikipedia.
31
Arroyo-Machado, Wenceslao, Daniel Torres-Salinas, Enrique Herrera-Viedma, and Esteban Romero-Frías. "Science through Wikipedia: A novel representation of open knowledge through co-citation networks." PLOS ONE 15, no. 2 (February 10, 2020): e0228713. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0228713.
Full text
32
ÖZGÜR, ARZUCAN, BURAK CETIN, and HALUK BINGOL. "CO-OCCURRENCE NETWORK OF REUTERS NEWS." International Journal of Modern Physics C 19, no. 05 (May 2008): 689–702. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/s0129183108012431.
Full textAbstract:
Networks describe various complex natural systems including social systems. We investigate the social network of co-occurrence in Reuters-21578 corpus, which consists of news articles that appeared in the Reuters newswire in 1987. People are represented as vertices and two persons are connected if they co-occur in the same article. The network has small-world features with power-law degree distribution. The network is disconnected and the component size distribution has power-law characteristics. Community detection on a degree-reduced network provides meaningful communities. An edge-reduced network, which contains only the strong ties has a star topology. "Importance" of persons are investigated. The network is the situation in 1987. After 20 years, a better judgment on the importance of the people can be done. A number of ranking algorithms, including Citation count and PageRank, are used to assign ranks to vertices. The ranks given by the algorithms are compared against how well a person is represented in Wikipedia. We find up to medium level Spearman's rank correlations. A noteworthy finding is that PageRank consistently performed worse than the other algorithms. We analyze this further and find reasons.
33
DONG, SHI-YONG. "Validation of the combination Tectaria pentagonalis (Tectariaceae)." Phytotaxa 496, no. 2 (April 12, 2021): 213–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.496.2.12.
Full textAbstract:
During the course of sorting out the species of Tectaria Cavanilles (1799: 115, Tectariaceae) in Indochina, I noticed that Tectaria pentagonalis (Phan 2001: 1024) has not validly published. Tectaria pentagonalis seems to be an inadvertent combination, because Phan (2001) did not provide authorship of T. pentagonalis when he made such a combination. The basionym of T. pentagonalis was cited by Phan (2001) in the form “Leptochilus pentagonalis Bonap., 1918”. This citation, according to Art. 41.5 of the International Code of Nomenclature (Turland et al. 2017), does not constitute a full and direct reference to the basionym, because the information of the basionym’s place of valid publication is missing. Thus, T. pentagonalis is justified as invalidly published. So far as I know, the invalidly published Tectaria pentagonalis was also used by Phan (2010) in his another publication and now is adopted in several online resources, such as GBIF (https://www.gbif.org/), Wikipedia (https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tectaria), and “Taxonomic Revision of Fern Genus Tectaria Cav. (Tectariaceae) in Thailand” (http://tectaria.myspecies.info/tectaria/tectaria-pentagonalis). For the purpose of legitimately applying T. pentagonalis in nomenclature, here I validly publish this combination and conveniently designate a lectotype for this species.
34
Kearney, Nicole. "If Wikipedia is the Gateway to Biodiversity Knowledge, How do we Open the Gate?" Biodiversity Information Science and Standards 3 (June 26, 2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/biss.3.37356.
Full textAbstract:
Wikipedia may have become the world’s principal source of information, but it is not a reliable source. Wikipedia itself is quite explicit on this point. The Wikipedia article entitled Wikipedia is not a reliable source clearly states that, because Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, at any time, “any information it contains at any particular time could be vandalism, a work in progress, or just plain wrong” (Wikipedia 2019a). Despite this, Wikipedia continues to gain status as a trusted authority on, well, everything. It does not, however, have authority on its own; it has authority because it links to authoritative sources. Wikipedia’s Verifiability policy (Wikipedia 2019b) states that: all material in its articles should be “attributable to reliable and published sources”; and all quotations and any material likely to be challenged “must be supported by inline citations”. all material in its articles should be “attributable to reliable and published sources”; and all quotations and any material likely to be challenged “must be supported by inline citations”. This does not mean that Wikipedia is always right; rather (according to the Wikipedia article Wikipedia is wrong) that “the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth” (Wikipedia 2019c). What this does mean is that Wikipedia is riddled with citations to the primary literature. Thus, articles about the world’s species reference taxonomic descriptions (and subsequent revisions), as well as scientific papers about physiology, evolution, behaviour, ecology, conservation, etc. In order “to facilitate the verification of sourced statements”, Wikipedia’s Scientific Citation Guidelines encourage editors to, wherever possible, include links to scientific articles in the form of DOIs (Digital Object Identifiers) (Wikipedia 2019d). A DOI is a unique, permanent and persistent identifier that is assigned to a fixed piece of online content (usually) at the time of its publication. The DOI system creates a reciprocal linked network of scholarly publications that allows researchers to click from article to article in a never-ending trail of knowledge (whether those articles are in scientific journals or on Wikipedia). This linked network functions seamlessly for modern scientific publications, because DOIs have been almost universally adopted by scientific publishers. But issues arise when it comes to linking to historic publications. Historic literature is the foundation upon which our understanding of biodiversity is based. If Wikipedia is the world’s gateway to that literature, Wikipedia editors must be able to find it and link to it. This presentation will discuss the complexities involved in linking from Wikipedia to the legacy scientific literature, particularly the availability of that literature online, the difference between easy and open access, and what the bioinformatics community can do to help.
35
Nielsen, Finn Arup. "Scientific citations in Wikipedia." First Monday, August 6, 2007. http://dx.doi.org/10.5210/fm.v12i8.1997.
Full textAbstract:
The Internet-based encyclopaedia Wikipedia has grown to become one of the most visited Web sites on the Internet, but critics have questioned the quality of entries. An empirical study of Wikipedia found errors in a 2005 sample of science entries. Biased coverage and lack of sources are among the "Wikipedia risks." This paper describes a simple assessment of these aspects by examining the outbound links from Wikipedia articles to articles in scientific journals with a comparison against journal statistics from Journal Citation Reports such as impact factors. The results show an increasing use of structured citation markup and good agreement with citation patterns seen in the scientific literature though with a slight tendency to cite articles in high-impact journals such as Nature and Science. These results increase confidence in Wikipedia as a reliable information resource for science in general.
36
Banasik-Jemielniak, Natalia, Dariusz Jemielniak, and Maciej Wilamowski. "Psychology and Wikipedia: Measuring Psychology Journals’ Impact by Wikipedia Citations." Social Science Computer Review, February 16, 2021, 089443932199383. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0894439321993836.
Full textAbstract:
The aim of the study was to explore the impact of peer-reviewed psychology journals on Wikipedia articles. We are presenting a rank of academic journals classified as pertaining to psychology, most cited on Wikipedia, as well as a rank of general-themed academic journals that were most frequently referenced in Wikipedia entries related to psychology. We then compare the list to journals that are considered most prestigious according to the SciMago journal rank score. Additionally, we describe the time trajectories of the knowledge transfer from the moment of the publication of an article to its citation in Wikipedia. We propose that the citation rate on Wikipedia, next to the traditional citation index, may be a good indicator of the work’s impact in the field of psychology.
37
Baker, Daniel. "Citations to Wikipedia in Law Reviews." SSRN Electronic Journal, 2009. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1525619.
Full text
38
Park, Taemin Kim. "The visibility of Wikipedia in scholarly publications." First Monday, July 24, 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.5210/fm.v16i8.3492.
Full textAbstract:
Publications in the Institute of Scientific Information’s (ISI, currently Thomson Reuters) Web of Science (WoS) and Elsevier’s Scopus databases were utilized to collect data about Wikipedia research and citations to Wikipedia. The growth of publications on Wikipedia research, the most active researchers, their associated institutions, academic fields and their geographic distribution are treated in this paper. The impact and influence of Wikipedia were identified, utilizing cited work found in (WoS) and Scopus. Additionally, leading authors, affiliated institutions, countries, academic fields, and publications that frequently cite Wikipedia are identified.
39
Li, Xuemei, Mike Thelwall, and Ehsan Mohammadi. "How are encyclopedias cited in academic research? Wikipedia, Britannica, Baidu Baike, and Scholarpedia." El Profesional de la información, September 9, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.3145/epi.2021.sep.08.
Full textAbstract:
Encyclopedias are sometimes cited by scholarly publications, despite concerns about their credibility as sources for academic information. This study investigates trends from 2002 to 2020 in citing two crowdsourced and two expert-based encyclopedias to investigate whether they fit differently into the research landscape: Wikipedia, Britannica, Baidu Baike, and Scholarpedia. This is the first systematic comparison of the uptake of four major encyclopedias within academic research. Scopus searches were used to count the number of documents citing the four encyclopedias in each year. Wikipedia was by far the most cited encyclopedia, with up to 1% of Scopus documents citing it in Computer Science. Citations to Wikipedia increased exponentially until 2010, then slowed down and started to decrease. Both the Britannica and Scholarpedia citation rates were increasing in 2020, however. Disciplinary and national differences include Britannica being popular in Arts and Humanities, Scholarpedia in Neuroscience, and Baidu Baike in Chinese-speaking countries/territories. The results confirm that encyclopedias have minor value for academic research, often for background and definitions, with the most suitable one varying between fields and countries, and with the first evidence that the popularity of crowdsourced encyclopedias may be waning.
40
Ukwoma, Scholastica Chizoma, Ngozi Eunice Osadebe, Victoria Nwamaka Okafor, and Chinwe Nwogo Ezeani. "Unveiling the veiled: Wikipedia collaborating with academic libraries in Africa in creating visibility for African women through Art+Feminism Wikipedia edit-a-thon." Digital Library Perspectives ahead-of-print, ahead-of-print (July 9, 2021). http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/dlp-08-2020-0079.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose This study aims to show that digital literacy can serve as a tool for effecting social change and highlights the achievements of an academic library in digital content creation using the Wikipedia platform. Design/methodology/approach The study adopted qualitative research method, Interview and document analysis were used for data gathering. Data gathered were analysed using content (conceptual) analysis. Findings Findings showed that the library has created or edited digital content for various categories of women, such as women in academia, industry and politics. These entries have received more than eight million views over a period of two years, which shows that the entries are being utilised. However, the editing exercise had been confronted with challenges such as accessing reliable citations in terms of the notability and verifiability policy of Wikipedia amongst others. Practical implications Currently, people rely more on online resources for their research, leaving physical library resources unused. Even, more students start their research online using Wikipedia. Thus, libraries could create visibility for their physical material using regularly visited sites like Wikipedia and its sister projects such as Wikidata; otherwise, these physical materials will remain invisible to the people that needed them. Originality/value Contributing to Wikipedia by creating a new entry or editing an existing one can help students to deepen their knowledge about a subject; Wikipedia editing may serve as an avenue for improving information literacy skills. Drawing from the theory of cyberfeminism as used in the study, information and communications technology has the potential to empower women and transform gender relations.
41
Groom, Quentin, Vanessa Lozano, Sofie Meeus, and Carlos Olmedo Castellanos. "Wikipedia, a Tool for Knowledge Dissemination on Invasive Species." Biodiversity Information Science and Standards 3 (June 26, 2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/biss.3.37386.
Full textAbstract:
One of the most important issues for controlling the spread of invasive species is public awareness (Dehnen-Schmutz et al. 2018). Passively, the public are responsible for the spread of invasive species, for example by moving dirty boats from one water body to another. But they also actively spread invasive species by releasing them in the wild. The spread of some invasive species could be slowed or even halted if the general public were more aware of the risks. Furthermore, this is a global issue, not restricted to one country or language, and hence needs to be tackled at an international level. The Convention on Biological Diversity has a specific target to identify pathways of introduction and manage invasive species (Convention on Biological Diversity 2014). As part of this awareness-raising, the public needs information on how to identify invasive species, as well as how to know their regulatory status, distribution and transmission. They also need to be aware of how invasive species impact biodiversity, ecosystem services and health. This information needs to be up-to-date, reliable and unbiased, but also supported by evidence. Many information platforms exist on invasive species and new information is being generated all the time on this dynamic issue. However, pre-eminent among information sources on the internet is Wikipedia. Consistently ranked in the top ten of most visited websites, with more than 15 billion page views a month across 300 language editions, it is the go-to website on many subjects (Wikimedia 2019). Invasive species such as the zebra mussel and water hyacinth receive over 500 daily page views, just on the English edition alone. Wikipedia is arguably one of the largest citizen science projects, containing information on every area of science and connecting, through its citations, scientific literature with the general public. Wikipedia has been criticized about many aspects of its content and editorship, including its quality and neutrality (Kumar et al. 2016, Wagner et al. 2016, Hargittai and Shaw 2014). Nevertheless, its dominance in the provision of information cannot be ignored and addressing Wikipedia's problems by direct engagement might be more productive than ignoring it. Increasingly, different disciplines are engaging with Wikipedia for communication, recognizing that it can be a productive communication channel (Murray 2018). Invasive species are a global problem and tackling them is a global issue. We have been investigating the current status of invasive species information on Wikipedia, whether it contains relevant information on impacts and control, and whether the information is consistent across different language versions. We will present what we have found and make recommendations on what to improve and how we can engage with Wikipedia.
42
Fraser, Nicholas, Fakhri Momeni, Philipp Mayr, and Isabella Peters. "The relationship between bioRxiv preprints, citations and altmetrics." Quantitative Science Studies, April 1, 2020, 1–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00043.
Full textAbstract:
A potential motivation for scientists to deposit their scientific work as preprints is to enhance its citation or social impact. In this study we assessed the citation and altmetric advantage of bioRxiv, a preprint server for the biological sciences. We retrieved metadata of all bioRxiv preprints deposited between November 2013 and December 2017, and matched them to articles that were subsequently published in peer-reviewed journals. Citation data from Scopus and altmetric data from Altmetric.com were used to compare citation and online sharing behavior of bioRxiv preprints, their related journal articles, and nondeposited articles published in the same journals. We found that bioRxiv-deposited journal articles had sizably higher citation and altmetric counts compared to nondeposited articles. Regression analysis reveals that this advantage is not explained by multiple explanatory variables related to the articles’ publication venues and authorship. Further research will be required to establish whether such an effect is causal in nature. bioRxiv preprints themselves are being directly cited in journal articles, regardless of whether the preprint has subsequently been published in a journal. bioRxiv preprints are also shared widely on Twitter and in blogs, but remain relatively scarce in mainstream media and Wikipedia articles, in comparison to peer-reviewed journal articles.
43
Nicholson, Joshua M., Ashish Uppala, Matthias Sieber, Peter Grabitz, Milo Mordaunt, and Sean C. Rife. "Measuring the quality of scientific references in Wikipedia: an analysis of more than 115M citations to over 800 000 scientific articles." FEBS Journal, November 19, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/febs.15608.
Full text
44
Esmaeili Givi, Mohammadreza, Mohammad Karim Saberi, Mojtaba Talafidaryani, Mahdi Abdolhamid, Rahim Nikandish, and Abbas Fattahi. "Assessment of the history and trends of “The Journal of Intellectual Capital”: a bibliometrics, altmetrics and text mining analysis." Journal of Intellectual Capital ahead-of-print, ahead-of-print (April 29, 2021). http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jic-02-2020-0057.
Full textAbstract:
PurposeThe Journal of Intellectual Capital (JIC) celebrated its 20th anniversary in 2020. Therefore, the present study aims to provide a general overview of the history and key trends in this journal during 2000–2019.Design/methodology/approachTwo types of citation and textual data during a 20-year journal period were retrieved from the Scopus database. The citation structures and contents were explored based on a combination of bibliometric analysis, altmetric analysis and text mining. The journal themes and trends of their changes were analyzed through citation bursts, mapping and topic modeling. To make a better comparison, the text mining process for the topic modeling of the IC field was performed in addition to the topic modeling of JIC.FindingsBibliometric analysis indicated that JIC has experienced a remarkable growth in terms of the number of publications and citations over the last 20 years. The results indicated that JIC plays a significant role among IC researchers. Additionally, a large number of researchers, institutes and countries have made contributions to this journal and cited its research papers. Altmetric analysis showed that JIC has been shared in different social media such as Twitter, Facebook, Wikipedia, Mendeley, Citeulike, news and blogs. Text mining abstract of JIC articles indicated that “measurement,” “financial performance” and “IC reporting” have the relative prevalence with increasing trends over the past 20 years. In addition, “research trends” and “national and international studies” had a stable trend with low thematic share.Research limitations/implicationsThe findings have important implications for the JIC editorial team in order to make informed decisions about the further development of JIC as well as for IC researchers and practitioners to make more valuable contributions to the journal.Originality/valueUsing bibliometric analysis, altmetric analysis and text mining, this study provided a systematic and comprehensive analysis of JIC. The simultaneous use of these methods provides an interesting, unique and suitable capacity to analyze the journals by considering their various aspects.
45
Bramantoro, Arif, and Ahmad A. "Data Citation Service for Wikipedia Articles." International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications 10, no. 4 (2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.14569/ijacsa.2019.0100468.
Full text
46
Alemu, Getaneh Agegn. "Development and Maintenance of the Ethiopian Legal Information Website." Afrika Focus 20, no. 1-2 (August 8, 2007). http://dx.doi.org/10.21825/af.v20i1-2.5073.
Full textAbstract:
Information and Communication Technology in general and the internet in particular have been creating unprecedented opportunities in facilitating and streamlining access to information. Websites have become a common way of publishing legal information for the public in many countries. In Ethiopia, however, the availability of legal websites has been very limited or non-existent. Except for the constitution, no other basic Ethiopian law has ever been published online. To benefit from the tremendous potentials of the internet, a project was initiated to develop an Ethiopian Legal Information Web Site.Based on users' requirements obtained from questionnaire analysis, and current paradigms and implications, the Ethiopian Legal Information Website was designed, developed, implemented and maintained. The website is an online database of Ethiopian basic laws developed by Mekelle University, Ethiopia, in cooperation with the Non-Western Law Department of Ghent University, Belgium.Basic laws included on the site at present are the Ethiopian Constitution, Civil Code, Criminal Code, Civil Procedure Code, Criminal Procedure Code, Commercial Code and Family Code. The laws can be viewed and used in full text html, whereas some of the laws including the 2004 Criminal Code, Family Code, FDKE Constitution and the Tigray Regional State Constitution are available in pdf Laws can be searched by keywords using the site search engine. Comments and suggestions from experts and Ethiopian laws users have been collected, hence modifications, improvements and additions have been made to the website. The Ethiopian Legal Information Website was first hosted on the University of Ghent internet server and currently in the Mekelle University server at http://mail.mu.edu. et/~ethiopialaws/.1 The Ethiopian Legal Information Website has been found to be a useful web portal to access and use the basic Ethiopian laws. The University of Ghent, ILO, the Library of Congress, AUSTLII, WASHLAW, WIKIPEDIA and other major legal web portals make citations in reference to the site. While the website currently contains only the basic laws of the federal government, an action plan is prepared to include regional laws of Ethiopia. Other legal information including amendments to the laws, decisions and legal news will also be included on the site, hence a comprehensive Ethiopian Legal Web Portal will be developed and maintained. Key Words: Legal Information, Legal Information Website, Digital Divide
47
Murgu, Cal, and Krisandra Ivings. "“Blind Trust is Not Enough”." Journal of Critical Library and Information Studies 2, no. 2 (March 3, 2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.24242/jclis.v2i2.62.
Full textAbstract:
This article draws attention to the often-unseen information inequalities that occur in the way that Wikipedia content is referenced. Drawing on digital information control and virtual gatekeeping scholarship, we contend that by not considering the degree to which references are practically accessible and verifiable, Wikipedia editors are implicitly promoting a control mechanism that is limiting the potential of Wikipedia to serve, as Willinsky puts it, “as a gateway to a larger world of knowledge.” We question the widespread practice of referencing peer-reviewed literature that is obscured by prohibitive paywalls. As we see it, two groups are disadvantaged by this practice. First, Wikipedia editors who lack access to the most current scholarly literature are unable to verify a reference or confirm the veracity of a fact or figure. Second, and perhaps most important, general readers are left with two unsatisfactory options in this scenario: they can either trust the authority of the citation or pay to access the article. Building on Don Fallis’ work on epistemic consequences of Wikipedia, this paper contends that promoting practically verifiable references would work to mitigate these inequalities and considers how relatively new initiatives could be used to improve the quality and utility of Wikipedia more generally.
Pre-print first published online 03/03/2019
48
Zhao, Dangzhi, and Andreas Strotmann. "Mapping knowledge domains on Wikipedia: an author bibliographic coupling analysis of traditional Chinese medicine." Journal of Documentation ahead-of-print, ahead-of-print (April 29, 2021). http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jd-02-2021-0039.
Full textAbstract:
PurposeWikipedia has the lofty goal of compiling all human knowledge. The purpose of the present study is to map the structure of the Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) knowledge domain on Wikipedia, to identify patterns of knowledge representation on Wikipedia and to test the applicability of author bibliographic coupling analysis, an effective method for mapping knowledge domains represented in published scholarly documents, for Wikipedia data.Design/methodology/approachWe adapted and followed the well-established procedures and techniques for author bibliographic coupling analysis (ABCA). Instead of bibliographic data from a citation database, we used all articles on TCM downloaded from the English version of Wikipedia as our dataset. An author bibliographic coupling network was calculated and then factor analyzed using SPSS. Factor analysis results were visualized. Factors were labeled upon manual examination of articles that authors who load primarily in each factor have significantly contributed references to. Clear factors were interpreted as topics.FindingsSeven TCM topic areas are represented on Wikipedia, among which Acupuncture-related practices, Falun Gong and Herbal Medicine attracted the most significant contributors to TCM. Acupuncture and Qi Gong have the most connections to the TCM knowledge domain and also serve as bridges for other topics to connect to the domain. Herbal medicine is weakly linked to and non-herbal medicine is isolated from the rest of the TCM knowledge domain. It appears that specific topics are represented well on Wikipedia but their conceptual connections are not. ABCA is effective for mapping knowledge domains on Wikipedia but document-based bibliographic coupling analysis is not.Originality/valueGiven the prominent position of Wikipedia for both information users and for researchers on knowledge organization and information retrieval, it is important to study how well knowledge is represented and structured on Wikipedia. Such studies appear largely missing although studies from different perspectives both about Wikipedia and using Wikipedia as data are abundant. Author bibliographic coupling analysis is effective for mapping knowledge domains represented in published scholarly documents but has never been applied to mapping knowledge domains represented on Wikipedia.
49
Kleminski, Rajmund, Przemysiaw Kazienko, and Tomasz Kajdanowicz. "Analysis of direct citation, co-citation and bibliographic coupling in scientific topic identification." Journal of Information Science, October 7, 2020, 016555152096277. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0165551520962775.
Full textAbstract:
In our study, we examine the impact of citation network structures on the ability to discern valuable research topics in Computer Science literature. We use the bibliographic information available in the DBLP database to extract candidate phrases from scientific paper abstracts. Following that, we construct citation networks based on direct citation, co-citation and bibliographic coupling relationships between the papers. The candidate research topics, in the form of keyphrases and n-grammes, are subsequently ranked and filtered by a graph-text ranking algorithm. This selection of the highest ranked potential topics is further evaluated by domain experts and through the Wikipedia knowledge base. The results obtained from these citation networks are complementary, returning valid but non-overlapping output phrases between some pairs of networks. In particular, bibliographic coupling appears to capture more unique information than either direct citation or co-citation. These findings point towards the possible added value in combining bibliographic coupling analysis with other structures. At the same time, combining direct citation and co-citation is put into question. We expect our findings to be utilised in method design for research topic identification.
50
Luyt, Brendan, and Daniel Tan. "Improving Wikipedia's credibility: References and citations in a sample of history articles." Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2010, n/a. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.21304.
Full text