Difference between revisions of "Submissions:2015/Interaction with article-subjects"

From WikiConference North America
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 38: Line 38:
# [[User:Tokyogirl79|Tokyogirl79]] ([[User talk:Tokyogirl79|talk]]) 05:36, 20 August 2015 (EDT)
# [[User:Tokyogirl79|Tokyogirl79]] ([[User talk:Tokyogirl79|talk]]) 05:36, 20 August 2015 (EDT)
# [[User:Ochilov|Ochilov]] ([[User talk:Ochilov|talk]]) 11:50, 21 August 2015 (EDT)
# [[User:Ochilov|Ochilov]] ([[User talk:Ochilov|talk]]) 11:50, 21 August 2015 (EDT)
# [[User:Soupvector|Soupvector]] [[User:Soupvector|Stuart Ray]] ([[User talk:Soupvector|talk]]) 22:05, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
# ''Add your username here.''

Revision as of 02:05, 26 August 2015

Data-based approach to article-subject participation
Type of submission
David King
E-mail address
Ethical Wiki

Members of the public relations community have advocated at several conferences, the press and elsewhere that article-subjects do not have a conflict of interest, because they share the same objectives as Wikipedia for a neutral, accurate, complete article. Many editors in turn express frustrations with an unmanageable volume of promotional or misleading self-interested editing.

In practice circumstances of self-interested editing vary dramatically from case to case. Calls for data that would promote more informed discussion about a diverse range of cases have gone unanswered. There are difficulties in obtaining data, because so much conflicted editing is not disclosed. Data about the usefulness of their edits, whether they are acting in good faith, and other characteristics are not easily measured.

In this presentation, Ethical Wiki will share data aggregated from more than 100 assessments provided to article-subjects that inquired about paid editing services over a one year period. Ethical Wiki has unique access to this data that would be exceptionally difficult for the volunteer community to obtain. Each data point is based on an audit of the available source material, phone interviews with the article-subject's representatives, as well as their stated objectives and desired edits during the assessment period.

Though this data would not stand against scientific scrutiny, due to a limited sample size and selection bias, it provides a reasonable basis for estimating the ratio at which different circumstances occur. It answers questions like how likely a conflicted editor is to make useful edits, how often they are acting in good or bad faith, and how often their objectives really are aligned with Wikipedia's. King will discuss options for improving how a diverse range of cases are handled and his approach for persuading article-subjects to abstain, while helping those that should be helped.

Length of presentation

30 minutes; 15 for presentation and 15 for discussion

Special schedule requests
Will you attend WikiConference USA if your submission is not accepted?

Yes; I already bought a ticket.

Interested attendees

If you are interested in attending this session, please sign with your username below. This will help reviewers to decide which sessions are of high interest. Sign with four tildes. (~~~~).

  1. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 05:36, 20 August 2015 (EDT)
  2. Ochilov (talk) 11:50, 21 August 2015 (EDT)
  3. Soupvector Stuart Ray (talk) 22:05, 25 August 2015 (EDT)