Research:Reliable sources and public policy issues on Wikipedia
This page documents a research project in progress.
Information may be incomplete and change as the project progresses.
Please contact the project lead before formally citing or reusing results from this page.
This research project seeks to understand the extent that policy research reports and papers from organisations are being cited on Wikipedia, what kinds of sources are being cited and how can editors and readers be supported in evaluating their credibility.
A key part of Wikimedia’s defence system against mis/disinformation is its content and citation policies however Wikipedia’s reliable sources policies are still grounded in traditional notions of the research publishing economy as primarily commercial and scholarly publishers and mainstream news media. This is problematic for public policy and public interest topics which tends to have a more diverse media economy of sources, including organisations based in government, civil society, education and commercial sectors, and genres such as reports, policy briefs, fact sheets and datasets.
Public policy is a complex, dynamic and multicentric environment and this is reflected in the diverse publishing ecosystem producing policy-related research including International NGOs, national government agencies, think tanks and research centres. Publications produced by organizations (grey literature) are often more timely and accessible and provide perspectives from community and Indigenous organizations, however some are also partisan and funded by commercial or vested interests – making evaluation of sources challenging.
It will analyse and extend existing research from English Wikipedia (including Avieson 2022; Ford et al. 2013; Lewoniewski 2022; Luyt 2021; Singh et al. 2021; Wong et al. 2021) the Missing Link Project, funded by a WMF Alliance grant in 2022. The research will involve mapping organisations and genres across key topics on English Wikipedia including analysis by location, topic area, sector and genre, and provide recommendations for improving guidelines that better reflect the complexity of the research publishing ecosystem. Wikidata will also be used to analyse and collect data, classify policy sources and genres and visualise key policy networks.
The project will provide new insights not only for Wikimedia but also for the wider evidence and policy research community. It will also help to strengthen Wikipedia’s verifiability processes and Wikimedia’s role as a leader in digital and media literacy and education – helping to deliver the 2030 Movement Strategy as essential infrastructure of the free knowledge ecosystem.
Methods
editTo answer the two main research questions listed above the project will take a sociotechnical approach to the research methods and analytical tools including content analysis, citation and network analysis, data linking, visualizations and case studies.
The focus of analysis will be on around 1000 public policy related articles and their citations on English Wikipedia combined with data from entities on Wikidata including concepts, organizations and publishers, locations and other data. Various administrative pages on English WP will also be analysed for guidelines and policies and a number of case studies developed on key topics and organizations.
To define the public policy domain, which crosses both science and social sciences, we will start with a number of key articles and use the internal link structure of Wikipedia combined with categories, Wikidata concepts, etc. to develop a list of key topics across the public policy domain. For example based on What links here link count the Public policy article on Wikipedia has 2,147 direct links from other articles while the Science policy article has 353 and Environmental policy 651. Many of these policy topics have lists and portals, country specific subpages etc. which will also be analysed to provide a corpus of around 1000 public policy related articles. Consultation on the list of articles for analysis will also occur with Wiki projects such as the science policy project and some of the environmental, public health and medicine projects as well as other special interest groups.
Following the selection of content, references will be extracted and classified then mapped to Wikidata entries, topics, and locations. The citations from the policy arena can then be compared to the full citation data for English Wikipedia. As discussed earlier, access to WP citations is not easy however there are various methods and tools which have been developed by other researchers which are available as well as existing datasets of citations. Arroyo-Machado et al. (2022) provide a summary table of Wikipedia data sources by format, update frequency, data quantity, type, and challenges which includes: Wikimedia Dumps, MediaWiki and Wikimedia APIs, Wiki Replicas, Event Streams, Analytics dumps, WikiStats, Dbpedia, XTools, Repositories and Altmetric aggregators. It is expected that for this research Wikipedia data dumps, web scraping from the target pages, and citation data sets from previous research will be the main data source for citations. These will be linked and enhanced with data from other databases such as Wikidata, CrossRef, ISNI, OpenAlex, Dimensions, Internet Archive etc.
The final dataset will then be analysed for frequency of citation, type of organization, and visualized using various tools such as network graphs, timelines, geospatial mapping etc. A rating of the reputation of sources will be made based on the information available on organizations via WP and WD, the reputable sources lists and other sources and where poor sources have been listed these may be flagged on the relevant pages. The data extraction, linking and analysis process will be assisted by a data scientist working on the project for 2 months.
Consultations and feedback with the Wikimedia community will occur at Wikimania in Singapore in August and the Wikidata conference in Taiwan in September 2023 and online with various projects including Wikicite and the Shared citations project. Funding for attending the Wikidata Conference in Taiwan is included in the budget.
Following an analysis of guidelines available on WP and consultation with various projects such as science and medicine and other interest groups a set of draft guidelines for grey literature will be developed and circulated and the data, a project report and journal article will be published open access.
Project activities
edit- Literature review and analysis of existing data
- Initial page review and analysis
- Consultations with community at Wikimania 2023, Singapore
- Review policy pages in WP and organizations in Wikidata and make selection of corpus
- Create knowledge graph based on page links
- Extract citation data from corpus into structured format
- Data cleaning and linking to Wikidata
- Data analysis and initial results write up
- Presentations of preliminary results
Forthcoming
- Final analysis and publication of results on Meta
- Publication of data and methods on project site and Github
- Journal article
Project extension
Further analysis of data may be possible using through external funding support and collaboration with colleagues in late 2024.
Policy, Ethics and Human Subjects Research
editN/A
Results
editAnalysis of results is still ongoing and will be updated here and in an open access publication later this year.
Outreach and Engagement
editPresentations
editAlthough the results are not yet finalised I have given a number of presentations on the topic of this research.
• Prior to receiving the grant I presented at the Worlds of Wikimedia conference at the University of Sydney in 2022 on public policy and organisations as sources in Wikipedia.
• Preliminary findings were presented at the International Communications Associations Conference, June 2024 on the Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
• On Wikipedia sources and data flows at the Wikihistories Symposium, June 2024, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
Publications
editAmanda Lawrence & Brigid van Wanrooy, New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia on "Sourcing public policy: organisation publishing in Wikipedia", https://doi.org/10.1080/13614568.2024.2343845 (Open Access)
Astract: Organisations across multiple sectors are prolific publishers in a range of genres including research reports, policy briefs, fact sheets, datasets and much more. Sometimes referred to as grey literature, these publications play a critical role in the circulation of research and ideas on public policy and public interest issues, yet they are often overlooked as part of the research publishing system, including on Wikipedia and Wikimedia. One of the cornerstones of Wikipedia is its reliance on citations from reliable sources, however little is known about the way in which organisation-produced and disseminated publications are understood and used as sources on Wikimedia platforms. This article reviews the literature and analyses available data on the sources used on English Wikipedia and what it can tell us about the extent to which policy reports from organisations are cited and the issues that arise with evaluating their reliability. We then provide a case study of a project underway by the Analysis & Policy Observatory (APO), a digital library of policy reports based in Australia, which aims to improve the presence of high-quality policy and research material and coverage of policy issues on Wikipedia.
Resources
editA project website has notes on work in progress. This is a bit out of date but will be updated with final results. A Github with the knowledge graph code will also be available shortly.
References
editPublic Zotero library of Wikimedia related publications that informed this work and beyond.
Amaral, Gabriel, Alessandro Piscopo, Lucie-aimée Kaffee, Odinaldo Rodrigues, and Elena Simperl. “Assessing the Quality of Sources in Wikidata Across Languages: A Hybrid Approach.” Journal of Data and Information Quality 13, no. 4 (October 15, 2021): 23:1-23:35. https://doi.org/10.1145/3484828.
ARL. “ARL White Paper on Wikidata Opportunities and Recommendations.” Association of Research Libraries, 2019. https://www.arl.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/2019.04.18-ARL-white-paper-on-Wikidata.pdf.
Arroyo-Machado, Wenceslao, Daniel Torres-Salinas, and Rodrigo Costas. “Wikinformetrics: Construction and Description of an Open Wikipedia Knowledge Graph Data Set for Informetric Purposes.” Quantitative Science Studies 3, no. 4 (December 20, 2022): 931–52. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00226.
Avieson, Bunty. “Breaking News on Wikipedia: Collaborating, Collating and Competing.” First Monday 24, no. 5 (2019). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v24i5.9530.
———. “Editors, Sources and the ‘go Back’ Button: Wikipedia’s Framework for Beating Misinformation.” First Monday, November 7, 2022. https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v27i11.12754.
———. “Two Wikipedias in Bhutan: Problems and Solutions for Knowledge Equity in the Digital Age.” Asian Journal of Communication 32, no. 5 (September 3, 2022): 399–416. https://doi.org/10.1080/01292986.2021.1937248.
Baltz, Samuel. “Wikipedia’s Political Science Coverage Is Biased. I Tried to Fix It.” Washington Post, February 24, 2021. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/02/24/wikipedias-political-science-coverage-is-biased-i-tried-fix-it/.
Benjakob, Omer, Rona Aviram, and Jonathan Aryeh Sobel. “Citation Needed? Wikipedia Bibliometrics during the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic.” GigaScience 11 (January 1, 2022): giab095. https://doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/giab095.
Benkler, Yochai. “From Utopia to Practice and Back.” In Wikipedia @ 20: Stories of an Incomplete Revolution, edited by Joseph Reagle, and Jackie Koerner. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2020. 10.7551/mitpress/12366.003.0006.
Bradley-Schmieg, Phil. “Wikipedia Is Now a Very Large Online Platform (VLOP) under New European Union Rules: Here’s What That Means for Wikimedians and Readers.” Diff (blog), May 4, 2023. https://diff.wikimedia.org/2023/05/04/wikipedia-is-now-a-very-large-online-platform-vlop-under-new-european-union-rules-heres-what-that-means-for-wikimedians-and-readers/.
Bruckman, Amy S. Should You Believe Wikipedia?: Online Communities and the Construction of Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780704.
Byron, M Justin, and John R Hughes. “Wikipedia and Nicotine and Tobacco: Meeting People Where They Are.” Nicotine & Tobacco Research 23, no. 11 (November 1, 2021): 1977–79. https://doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntab087.
Cairney, Paul, Tanya Heikkila, and Matthew Wood. Making Policy in a Complex World. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108679053.
Cantallops, Marçal Mora, Salvador Sánchez-Alonso, and E. G. Barriocanal. “A Systematic Literature Review on Wikidata.” Data Technol. Appl., 2019. https://doi.org/10.1108/DTA-12-2018-0110.
Centelles, Miquel, and Núria Ferran-Ferrer. “Assessing Knowledge Organization Systems from a Gender Perspective: Wikipedia Taxonomy and Wikidata Ontologies.” Journal of Documentation 80, no. 7 (January 1, 2024): 124–47. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-11-2023-0230.
Crompton, Constance, Lori Antranikian, Ruth Truong, and Paige Maskell. “Familiar Wikidata: The Case for Building a Data Source We Can Trust.” Pop! Public. Open. Participatory, no. 2 (October 31, 2020). https://www.popjournal.ca/issue02/crompton.
Dehdarirad, T., F. Didegah, and H. Sotudeh. “Which Type of Research Is Cited More Often in Wikipedia? A Case Study of PubMed Research,” 2018. https://hdl.handle.net/1887/65240.
Elmimouni, Houda, Andrea Forte, and Jonathan Morgan. “Why People Trust Wikipedia Articles: Credibility Assessment Strategies Used by Readers.” In Proceedings of the 18th International Symposium on Open Collaboration, 1–10. OpenSym ’22. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1145/3555051.3555052.
Fetahu, Besnik, Katja Markert, Wolfgang Nejdl, and Avishek Anand. “Finding News Citations for Wikipedia.” In Proceedings of the 25th ACM International on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, 337–46. CIKM ’16. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1145/2983323.2983808.
Ford, H., M. Graham, and E. Meyer. “Fact Factories: Wikipedia and the Power to Represent.” Http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text, University of Oxford, 2015. https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:b34fdd6c-ec15-4bcd-acba-66a777739b4d.
Ford, Heather. “Rise of the Underdog,” October 13, 2020. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/12366.003.0017.
Ford, Heather, Shilad Sen, David R. Musicant, and Nathanial Miller. “Getting to the Source.” In Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on Open Collaboration, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1145/2491055.2491064.
“Between News and History: Identifying Networked Topics of Collective Attention on Wikipedia.” Journal of Computational Social Science 6, no. 2 (October 1, 2023): 845–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42001-023-00215-w.
Guglielmi, Giorgia. “Wikipedia’s Top-Cited Scholarly Articles — Revealed.” Nature 557, no. 7705 (May 14, 2018): 291–92. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-05161-6.
Hoof, Marieke van, Corine S Meppelink, Judith Moeller, and Damian Trilling. “Searching Differently? How Political Attitudes Impact Search Queries about Political Issues.” New Media & Society, July 11, 2022, 14614448221104405. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448221104405.
Iliadis, Andrew. Semantic Media: Mapping Meaning on the Internet. Cambridge ; Polity Press, 2023.
Jankowski, Steve. “The Wikipedia Imaginaire: A New Media History beyond Wikipedia.Org (2001–2022).” Internet Histories 0, no. 0 (August 12, 2023): 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/24701475.2023.2246261.
Jemielniak, Dariusz, Gwinyai Masukume, and Maciej Wilamowski. “The Most Influential Medical Journals According to Wikipedia: Quantitative Analysis.” Journal of Medical Internet Research 21, no. 1 (January 18, 2019): e11429. https://doi.org/10.2196/11429.
Kokash, Natallia, and Giovanni Colavizza. “Wikipedia Citations: Reproducible Citation Extraction from Multilingual Wikipedia.” arXiv, June 27, 2024. http://arxiv.org/abs/2406.19291.
Kopf, Susanne. A Discursive Perspective on Wikipedia: More than an Encyclopaedia? Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11024-5.
Lawrence, Amanda. “Influence Seekers: The Production of Grey Literature for Policy and Practice.” Information Services and Use 37 (August 1, 2018): 389–403. https://doi.org/10.3233/ISU-170857.
———. “Research Use and Publishing Diversity: The Role of Organisation Research Publishing for Policy and Practice.” Australian Journal of Public Administration 82, no. 1 (November 2022): 46–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12563.
Lawrence, Amanda, and Brigid van Wanrooy. “Sourcing Public Policy: Organisation Publishing in Wikipedia.” New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia 0, no. 0 (May 20, 2024): 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13614568.2024.2343845.
Lemmerich, Florian, Diego Sáez-Trumper, Robert West, and Leila Zia. “Why the World Reads Wikipedia: Beyond English Speakers.” In Proceedings of the Twelfth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, 618–26. WSDM ’19. Melbourne Australia: Association for Computing Machinery, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1145/3289600.3291021.
Lerner, Jürgen, and Alessandro Lomi. “Knowledge Categorization Affects Popularity and Quality of Wikipedia Articles.” PLOS ONE 13, no. 1 (January 2, 2018): e0190674. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190674.
Lewoniewski, Włodzimierz. “Identification of Important Web Sources of Information on Wikipedia across Various Topics and Languages.” Procedia Computer Science, Knowledge-Based and Intelligent Information & Engineering Systems: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference KES2022, 207 (January 1, 2022): 3290–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2022.09.387.
Lewoniewski, Włodzimierz, Krzysztof Węcel, and Witold Abramowicz. “Modeling Popularity and Reliability of Sources in Multilingual Wikipedia.” Information 11, no. 5 (May 2020): 263. https://doi.org/10.3390/info11050263.
Moss, Giles, and Heather Ford. “How Accountable Are Digital Platforms?” In A Research Agenda for Digital Politics. Edward Elgar Publishing, 2020. https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/tx2db/download.
Müller-Birn, Claudia, and Mariam Farda-Sarbas,. “Wikidata from a Research Perspective -- A Systematic Mapping Study of Wikidata.” arXiv:1908.11153, 2019. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1908.11153.
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.” The FEBS Journal 288, no. 14 (2021): 4242–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/febs.15608.
Okoli, Chitu, Mohamad Mehdi, Mostafa Mesgari, Finn Årup Nielsen, and Arto Lanamäki. “Wikipedia in the Eyes of Its Beholders: A Systematic Review of Scholarly Research on Wikipedia Readers and Readership.” Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 65, no. 12 (2014): 2381–2403. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23162.
Osman, Kim. “The Free Encyclopaedia That Anyone Can Edit: The Shifting Values of Wikipedia Editors.” Culture Unbound: Journal of Current Cultural Research 6 (2014): Article number: 30593-607. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/72898/.
Petroni, Fabio, Samuel Broscheit, Aleksandra Piktus, Patrick Lewis, Gautier Izacard, Lucas Hosseini, Jane Dwivedi-Yu, et al. “Improving Wikipedia Verifiability with AI.” Nature Machine Intelligence 5, no. 10 (October 2023): 1142–48. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-023-00726-1.
Piccardi, Tiziano, Miriam Redi, Giovanni Colavizza, and Robert West. “On the Value of Wikipedia as a Gateway to the Web.” In Proceedings of the Web Conference 2021, 249–60. WWW ’21. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442381.3450136.
Radar, Anna C. “How Do Users Interact in Wikipedia?,” 2020. Reagle, Joseph, and Jackie Koerner, eds. Wikipedia @ 20: Stories of an Incomplete Revolution, 2020. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/12366.001.0001.
Redi, Miriam, Besnik Fetahu, Jonathan Morgan, and Dario Taraborelli. “Citation Needed: A Taxonomy and Algorithmic Assessment of Wikipedia’s Verifiability.” In The World Wide Web Conference, 1567–78. WWW ’19. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1145/3308558.3313618.
Ren, Ruqin, and Jian Xu. “It’s Not an Encyclopedia, It’s a Market of Agendas: Decentralized Agenda Networks between Wikipedia and Global News Media from 2015 to 2020.” New Media & Society, January 28, 2023, 14614448221149641. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448221149641.
Rosenzweig, Roy. “Can History Be Open Source? Wikipedia and the Future of the Past.” The Journal of American History 93, no. 1 (2006): 117–46. https://doi.org/10.2307/4486062.
Sahut, Gilles, and André Tricot. “Wikipedia: An Opportunity to Rethink the Links between Sources’ Credibility, Trust and Authority,” November 5, 2018.
Sedgwick, Robert E., and Rachel Ross. “Making Grey Literature Discoverable and Impactful on JSTOR Through Comprehensive Search and Rich Metadata.” The Serials Librarian 79, no. 3–4 (November 16, 2020): 261–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2020.1847740.
Shah, Chirag, and Emily M. Bender. “Envisioning Information Access Systems: What Makes for Good Tools and a Healthy Web?” Association for Computing Machinery, September 2023. https://doi.org/TBC - need to update when published.
Shaw, Aaron, and Eszter Hargittai. “The Pipeline of Online Participation Inequalities: The Case of Wikipedia Editing.” Journal of Communication 68, no. 1 (February 1, 2018): 143–68. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqx003.
Singer, Philipp, Florian Lemmerich, Robert West, Leila Zia, Ellery Wulczyn, Markus Strohmaier, and Jure Leskovec. “Why We Read Wikipedia.” In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web, 1591–1600. WWW ’17. Perth, Australia: International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1145/3038912.3052716.
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 (April 8, 2021): 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00105.
Smith, Denise A. “It’s Time to Recognize Wikipedia as a Health Information Resource.” Journal of Consumer Health on the Internet 27, no. 2 (April 3, 2023): 210–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/15398285.2023.2211498.
Steinsson, Sverrir. “Rule Ambiguity, Institutional Clashes, and Population Loss: How Wikipedia Became the Last Good Place on the Internet.” American Political Science Review, March 9, 2023, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055423000138.
Thorpe, Kirsten, Nathan Sentance, and Lauren Booker. “Wikimedia Australia and First Nations Metadata: Utilising the ATSILIRN Protocols to Create Culturally Appropriate Description and Access.” New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia 0, no. 0 (June 26, 2024): 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/13614568.2024.2374294.
Tkacz, Nathaniel. Being with Data: The Dashboarding of Everyday Life. S.l: POLITY PRESS, 2022. ———. “Open Sesame: The Rise and Rise of Open Source Politics.” Aeon, 2013. https://aeon.co/essays/bazaar-the-rise-and-rise-of-open-source-politics. ———. Wikipedia and the Politics of Openness. Chicago ; University of Chicago Press, 2015.
Torres-Salinas, Daniel, Esteban Romero-Frías, and Wenceslao Arroyo-Machado. “Mapping the Backbone of the Humanities through the Eyes of Wikipedia.” Journal of Informetrics 13, no. 3 (August 1, 2019): 793–803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2019.07.002.
Triedman, Hal, Isaac Johnson, and Nuria Ruiz. “New Dataset Uncovers Wikipedia Browsing Habits While Protecting Users.” Diff (blog), June 21, 2023. https://diff.wikimedia.org/2023/06/21/new-dataset-uncovers-wikipedia-browsing-habits-while-protecting-users/.
Trokhymovych, Mykola, and Diego Saez-Trumper. “WikiCheck: An End-to-End Open Source Automatic Fact-Checking API Based on Wikipedia.” arXiv, September 2, 2021. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2109.00835.
Turki, Houcemeddine, Mohamed Ali Hadj Taieb, Thomas Shafee, Tiago Lubiana, Dariusz Jemielniak, Mohamed Ben Aouicha, Jose Labra Gayo, et al. “Representing COVID-19 Information in Collaborative Knowledge Graphs: The Case of Wikidata.” Semantic Web, September 28, 2021, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.3233/SW-210444.
Waagmeester, Andra, Gregory Stupp, Sebastian Burgstaller-Muehlbacher, Benjamin M Good, Malachi Griffith, Obi L Griffith, Kristina Hanspers, et al. “Wikidata as a Knowledge Graph for the Life Sciences.” Edited by Peter Rodgers and Chris Mungall. eLife 9 (March 17, 2020): e52614. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.52614.
Wellstead, Adam M., and Michael Howlett. “(Re)Thinking Think Tanks in the Age of Policy Labs: The Rise of Knowledge-Based Policy Influence Organisations.” Australian Journal of Public Administration 81, no. 1 (March 1, 2022): 224–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12528.
Westerinen, Andea. “Understanding Wikidata,” March 16, 2024. https://github.com/AndreaWesterinen/Wikidata-and-OWL/blob/94a1dd6ef6e6c80897cf04a1f706a2e5802a597e/papers/Understanding%20Wikidata.pdf.
Wong, KayYen, Miriam Redi, and Diego Saez-Trumper. “Wiki-Reliability: A Large Scale Dataset for Content Reliability on Wikipedia.” In Proceedings of the 44th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, 2437–42, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1145/3404835.3463253.
Wyatt, Liam. “Gratis & Libre: Wikipedia’s Role in Free and Open History Production and Dissemination.” New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia 27, no. 3 (July 3, 2021): 260–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/13614568.2021.1900924.
Yang, Puyu, and Giovanni Colavizza. “A Map of Science in Wikipedia.” In Companion Proceedings of the Web Conference 2022 (WWW ’22 Companion), April 25–29, 2022, Virtual Event, Lyon, France. A, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1145/3487553.3524925.
———. “Polarization and Reliability of News Sources in Wikipedia.” arXiv, November 21, 2022. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2210.16065.
Zia, Leila, Isaac Johnson, Bahodir Mansurov, Jonathan Morgan, Miriam Redi, Diego Saez-Trumper, and Dario Taraborelli. “Knowledge Integrity - Wikimedia Research 2030,” February 14, 2019. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.7704626.v2.