Community health initiative/Interaction Timeline/UIA research

This page will record my anonymized findings of how the User Interaction Analyser (https://tools.wmflabs.org/sigma/editorinteract.py) is used on English Wikipedia.

My methodology

• Using Special:LinkSearch I found several instances of users discussing the tool. (query)
• I also highlighted links to the tool using the following JS:

$("a[href*='wmflabs.org/sigma/']").css('color','pink');

Sockpuppet investigations

The EIA is used very commonly in sockpuppet investigations. It's great to see this tool serving multiple purposes, but for the sake of of the User Interaction History tool I will ignore Sockpuppet investigation uses.

Wikihounding

• In one instance (α) a user reported to ANI that they were being hounded and harassed by another user. They provided a few links to diffs and article histories. A second user suggested they use the tool. "I would like to see a list of diffs where they started editing a page only after you did. The Editor Interaction Analyzer at https://tools.wmflabs.org/sigma/editorinteract.py is a good tool for doing that sort of research." The reporting user then provided several cherry-picked timeline links for specific articles, and three times later in the discussion provided more timeline links. In the end a mutual IBAN was enacted.
• In another instance (β) User:A reported on User:B's talk page that User:C was hounding them. User:D provided a link to the EIA: "To see whether your complaint was actionable, I took the liberty of comparing your interactions using this tool. In the resulting page, there are links to various "timeline" interactions on one page. I saw two timelines that show recent instances of User:B following you around: article_one, and article_two. [...] It's clear User:B followed you to that discussion by looking at your contributions."
• In another instance (γ) User:A reported User:B to ANI. User:C came to cast User:A in a bad light and User:A replied, posting an EIA link for User:A and User:C to dispute their attack: "Anyone interested in the truth [...] can also look at this Editor Interaction Analyzer tool."

Takeaways

• Single article abuse vs. the big picture
  • Sometimes there is the need to just see how two users interaction on a single wiki page, but the whole story is also important.
  • Cherry-picking timeline links can be nonconstructive in an investigation. How can the timeline link page remind visitors that these users have also co-edited on other pages?
  • Question to investigate: When viewing just two users' activity on the same page, is it important to see other editors? Maybe we could visually show this other information.