The work of sustaining order in Wikipedia: the banning of a vandal
|Conference paper (help)|
|The work of sustaining order in Wikipedia: the banning of a vandal|
|Authors:||R. Stuart Geiger, David Ribes|
|Citation:||Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work : 117-126. 2010|
|Publisher:||Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA|
|Meeting:||2010 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work|
|Web:||DuckDuckGo Bing Google Yahoo! — Google PDF|
|Article:||Google Scholar PubMed|
|Restricted:||DTU Digital Library|
The work of sustaining order in Wikipedia: the banning of a vandal examines the "social" role of software tools (bots) in the English Wikipedia, especially those that fight vandalism.
The statistics reported in the paper was also first and fully reported in The social roles of bots and assisted editing programs.
The tools are described, e.g., "Huggle" that was the "most widely-used assisted editing program" (at the time), which features built-in queuing mechanism and pre-written warning messages.
Geiger and Ribes give a narrative of the reverting and blocking of a vandal using a combination of assisted editing tools and bots showing how multiple Wikipedia editors as vandal fighters use Huggle and Twinkle and how the tools interact together with ClueBot over a fifteen minute period
- "The encyclopedia project's unlikely and unexpected success must also be attributed to a whole host of technological actors" (page 118)
- "vandal fighters are not merely individually assisted by such tools, but rather are joined together by the various software programs into a decentralized network." (page 123)
- They regard vandalism fighting in terms of "distributed cognition" and "delegated cognition".
They identify assisted editing tools edit by looking at edit summaries, e.g., HG for the Huggle tool and TW for Twinkle. They call this approach "trace ethnography" (page 119).