[url="http://news.google.com/news/url?fd=R&sa=T&url=http://uanews.org/node/30454&usg=AFQjCNFRTcTiCzsMrKJqkOecRBwid48O3Q"][img]http://nt0.ggpht.com/news/tbn/VLkV-ASkjnbLEM/6.jpg[/img]
UA News (press release)[/url]
<img alt="" height="1" width="1" />Who Does What on [b]Wikipedia?[/b]
UA News (press release)
"We found that all-round contributors dominated the best-quality entries." -Sudha Ram, a UA Eller College of Management professor. ...
View the article
Full Version: Who Does What on Wikipedia? - UA News (press release)
QUOTE
"If we want scientists to be collaborative," Ram said, "we need to assign them to specific roles and motivate them to police themselves and justify their contributions."
Sounds like someone's been tapping the JimboJuice.
The conference paper mentioned is available here. Sounds much like the work done by Huberman and Wilkinson (2007), which is rather shockingly not cited.
QUOTE(John Limey @ Thu 4th March 2010, 3:44pm) 
The conference paper mentioned is available here. Sounds much like the work done by Huberman and Wilkinson (2007), which is rather shockingly not cited.
Must have taken a cue from ol' ZooPro:
QUOTE
"This is Wikipedia we dont attribute any editor for information used in the article..."
I'd like to see their data set. Particularly, I want to see the four featured articles where the "casual contributors" cluster weighed most heavily on the finished product.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.