Moira Burke
Robert Kraut
ABSTRACT
As Wikipedia grows, so do the messy byproducts of collaboration. Backlogs of administrative work are increasing, suggesting the need for more users with privileged admin status. This paper presents a model of editors who have successfully passed the peer review process to become admins. The lightweight model is based on behavioral metadata and comments, and does not require any page text. It demonstrates that the Wikipedia community has shifted in the last two years to prioritizing policymaking and organization experience over simple article-level coordination, and mere edit count does not lead to adminship. The model can be applied as an "AdminFinderBot" to automatically search all editors' histories and pick out likely future admins, as a self-evaluation tool, or as a dashboard of relevant statistics for voters evaluating admin candidates.
- Butler, B., Joyce, E., and Pike, J. Don't look now, but we've created a bureaucracy: The nature and roles of policies and rules in Wikipedia. Proc. CHI 2008, ACM Press (2008). Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Cosley, D., Frankowski, D., Terveen, L., and Riedl, J. SuggestBot: Using intelligent task routing to help people 5 http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/04/wikipedia_secret_mailing find work in Wikipedia. Proc. IUI 2007, ACM Press (2007), 32--41. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Dawes, R. M. (1979). The robust beauty of improper linear models in decision making. American Psychologist, 34(7), 571--582.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Forte, A., and Bruckman, A. Scaling consensus: Increasing decentralization in Wikipedia governance. Proc. HICSS 2008. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hastie, R., & Dawes, R. M. (2001). Rational choice in an uncertain world: The psychology of judgment and decision making. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Karau, S., and Williams, K. Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65 (1993), 681--706.Google Scholar
- Kittur, A., Chi, E., Pendleton, B., Suh, B., and Mytkowicz, T. Power of the few vs. wisdom of the crowd: Wikipedia and the rise of the bourgeoisie. Proc CHI 2007, ACM Press (2007).Google Scholar
- Kittur, A., Suh, B., Pendleton, B. A., Chi., E. (2007). He says, she says: Conflict and coordination in Wikipedia. Proc CHI 2007, ACM Press (2007), 453--462. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ng, T. W. H., Eby, L. T., Sorensen, K. L., & Feldman, D. C. (2005). Predictors of objective and subjective career success: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 367--409.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Priedhorsky, R., Chen, J., Lam, S., Panciera, K., Terveen, L., and Riedl, J. 2007. Creating, destroying, and restoring value in Wikipedia. Proc GROUP 2007, ACM Press (2007), 259--268. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Stumpf, S. A., & London, M. (1981). Capturing rater policies in evaluating candidates for promotion. The Academy of Management Journal, 24(4), 752--766.Google Scholar
- Viegas, F., Wattenberg, M., and Dave., K. Studying cooperation and conflict between authors with history flow visualizations. Proc CHI 2004, ACM Press (2004), 575--582. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Viegas, F., Wattenberg, M., Kriss, J., and van Ham, F. Talk before your type: Coordination in Wikipedia. Proc HICSS 2007, 575--582. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Taking up the mop: identifying future wikipedia administrators
Recommendations
Don't look now, but we've created a bureaucracy: the nature and roles of policies and rules in wikipedia
CHI '08: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsWikis are sites that support the development of emergent, collective infrastructures that are highly flexible and open, suggesting that the systems that use them will be egalitarian, free, and unstructured. Yet it is apparent that the flexible ...
Mopping up: modeling wikipedia promotion decisions
CSCW '08: Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative workThis paper presents a model of the behavior of candidates for promotion to administrator status in Wikipedia. It uses a policy capture framework to highlight similarities and differences in the community's stated criteria for promotion decisions to ...
Wikipedia's “Neutral Point of View”: Settling Conflict through Ambiguity
This article discusses how one of the most important Wikipedia policies, the “neutral point of view” (NPOV), is appropriated and interpreted by the participants in the Wikipedia project. By analyzing a set of constitutive documents for the Wikipedian ...
Comments