Wikipedia and World Wide Argument Web (DERI meeting 2010-12-03)

Copyright 2010 Digital Enterprise Research Institute. All rights reserved.

Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie

Constructing knowledge through argument: Wikipedia

and World Wide Argument Web

Jodi Schneider, Alexandre Passant, John Breslin

DERI Meeting2010-12-03Galway, Ireland


2

Outline

The Vision Research Progress Future Plans


World Wide Web & Argument

3


World Wide Argument Web (WWAW)

4

What if instead of following mailing lists, blogs, online magazines, scientific journals…

You could follow ARGUMENTS? Who is arguing about this topic? Or product? Or idea? Is their view positive or negative? Are their ideas credible? Are they trustworthy? Do people I trust, trust them? What arguments are they making?


Arguments on Wikipedia

5


Wikipedians argue on Talk pages

6


7


Lots of conversations Viégas: “the fastest growing areas

of Wikipedia are devoted to coordination and organization”

When are people agreeing/disagreeing? Not well understood!

Very little study of Talk pages Largest study: 60 pages, 2 types.

Discovered: Featured Articles have 10x discussion!

Immense variation between pages

7

Talk pages need semantics

Data from Stvilia


My Research Questions

8

1. What do Wikipedians do on Talk pages?2. What kind of arguments happen on Talk pages?3. Can we add structure to make pages “fit” how

editors and readers use them?


Three ways of understanding Talk pages

9

1. Interviews with editors and administratorsWhat do Wikipedians do on Talk pages?

2. Hand content analysis of 100 Talk pagesWhat kind of arguments happen on Talk pages?

3. A semantic annotation infrastructureCan we add structure to make pages “fit” how editors

and readers use them?


1. Interviews

10

Administrators Frequently monitor conversations Know + meet co-editors Make community-related edits such as adding infoboxes More likely to move/rename articles and Talk pages

Editors Mostly read Talk pages “Get the scoop”—what’s controversial? More details? More likely to read older conversations May learn policy and procedures


2. Content Analysis

11

100 Talk pages 5 categories of pages

Most editors (of the article) Most visits (to the article) Controversial Featured Articles Random

15 classifications


12


Classification Examples

12

Classification Example

Reference to...

Sources outside the wiki ... Not sure where to put it but I’ll leave it here as somebody might find it useful

Reverts, removed material, or controversial edits

I noticed some people edit the page into what it will be in 10 minutes but someone is reverting it...just let it be

Edits the discussant made Added the About.com review since the review was part of the reception section.

Requests for...

Help with another article, portal, etc.

This is just to invite attention to the page Facebook statistics just created…


13


Our SIOC WikiTalk ontology

WikiDiscussionItem ReferenceItem

– ReferenceToEdit – ReferenceToGuidelinesOrPolicies – ReferenceToInternalResources – ReferenceToRevertsOrControversialOrRemovedMaterial– ReferenceToVandalism

RequestItem– RequestEditingCoordination – RequestHelpElsewhere – RequestInfo – RequestPeer-review

http://rdfs.org/sioc/wikitalk



15

3. Semantic markup for Talk pages

Develop a content-based semantic model Hand markup Wikipedia Talk pages with RDFa Query to find comments meeting specified

criteria JavaScript and SPARQL

Formative evaluations Browsing talk pages with & without highlight plugins to

identify particular comments


Structuring Talk Pages: Semantics

Reusing existing models (FOAF/SIOC) Article: sioct:WikiArticle Link article to the Talk page: sioc:has_discussion Discussions: sioc:Thread Individual comments: sioc:Post Commenter: foaf:Person / sioc:UserAccount

New elements from the previous categorization http://rdfs.org/sioc/wikitalk Focus on references and requests:

– Difficult to imagine people marking their own comment as off-topic; however, labeling “request for help” is plausible

– Relevant for querying and retrieving information



17


Example RDFa markup

17


Using the markup: JavaScript bookmarklets

18

Highlight posts based on the ontology class – e.g. ReferenceToEdit


19

Retrieve RequestInfo posts in WikiProject Computing

SELECT ?commment ?page WHERE {

?page sioc:links_to <http://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/Template:WikiProject_Computing > .

?comment sioc:has_container ?page ; a sioc:Post ; a siocwt:RequestInfo .

}


20

Retrieve posts by novices which have no replies

SELECT ?comment ?reply ?user ?name WHERE {

?comment a sioc:Post ; sioc:has_creator ?user .

OPTIONAL { ?user sioc:name ?name . }

OPTIONAL { ?comment sioc:has_reply ?reply . }

FILTER (!BOUND(?name)) FILTER (!BOUND(?reply))}


Back to the World Wide Argument Web

21


Arguing all over the Web

Wikipedia is not the only place people argue.

Research questions: What related arguments are there? What new arguments that I haven’t seen are

there? Should I believe this argument?

22


Arguments at BBC’s Have Your Say

A simple argument:“Banning new drivers

from driving at night

would be a knee-jerk

reaction to a particular

statistic.

Cars differ from public

transport in that you

can go anywhere at any

time so why take this

advantage away?”

23


Analysis

The simplest argument: <claim, reason>

Claim:Banning new drivers from driving at night

would be a knee-jerk reaction

Reason: With a car you can go anywhere at any time

Incomplete!

24


Example at BBC’s Have Your SayA Case: “I think the proposed restrictions on young drivers

are completely unrealistic and unfair. When I was 18 and bought my first car I was studying for my A-levels during the day and therefore needed to work in the evenings to earn my own money and pay for the upkeep of my car. I finished work between 11pm and midnight. If these restrictions had been in place I would have had three options: 1-give up my job (I think we can all agree that the current government is aiming to encourage more people to work and take pride in earning their own money, not rely on state handouts or their parents. 2 - Walk home alone in the dark (clearly this is not a sensible option either for obvious reasons) 3 - demand my parents pick me up and drop me off to work each night (this is also unreasonable as many young people cannot rely on their parents for many reasons e.g. if their parents are also working late or cannot drive).”

25


WWAW-related questions

What’s possible now? What can the Social Web and Social Semantic

Web contribute? How can we make the WWAW as easy to use as

Web2.0 tools?

26


Parts of the WWAW exist

27

An interchange format Argument Interchange Format

Argument schemes ‘Argument from Position to Know’, ‘Argument from

Expertise’, … Argument-related ontologies

IBIS, ScholOnto, SWAN/SIOC, … Prototype interfaces

Argument blogging, Arvina, MAgtALO, … RDF and OWL-based systems

Avicenna, ArgDF


Argument blogging (AIF+DGDL)

28

Source: Wells, Gourlay, & Reed, “Argument blogging,” CMNA 2009


Generate argument maps from conversations (Arvina, MAgtALO)

29

Snaith, Lawrence, & Reed, “Mixed initiative argument in public deliberation,” ODET 2010


30

Collating blog comments

Collation & querying across the Web

Sindice SIOC plugin for WordPress blogs: did a commenter post on other websites?


Challenge: Adapt for the Social!

People don’t want to classify their comments. Many assumptions are implicit. “Don’t make me think!” Not all arguments are equally effective—and not

everyone is susceptible to the same arguments!

31


Social Semantic Web

32


Social Semantic Web research

Trust & credibility layer Golbeck, Computing with

Social Trust, Springer 2008 Hartig, Querying Trust in RDF

Data with tSPARQL, ESWC 2009

33

http://www.w3.org/2007/03/layerCake.svg


Summary

We can increase the effectiveness of Wikipedia Talk pages by understanding how they are used

We add semantic structure to Wikipedia Talk pages which can be used to extract socially useful info

The World Wide Argument Web is an exciting research area with an existing infrastructure and a need for Social Semantic Web expertise

34


Thank You!

35

Questions & Comments?

Contact: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


Our Wikipedia-Related Research

“Understanding and Improving Wikipedia Article Discussion Spaces.” In SAC 2011 (Web Track), TaiChung, Taiwan, March 21-25, 2011.

“Enhancing MediaWiki Talk pages with Semantics for Better Coordination - A Proposal.” In The Fifth Workshop on Semantic Wikis: Linking Data and People Workshop at 7th Extended Semantic Web Conference (ESWC), Crete, Greece, May 31, 2010.

“A Content Analysis: How Wikipedia Talk Pages Are Used.” In WebSci2010, Web Science Conference. Raleigh, NC, April 26 & 27 2010.

36


References

Stvilia, Twidale, Smith & Gasser, "Information Quality Work Organization in Wikipedia," JASIST 2008. doi: 10.1002/asi.2081

Viégas, Wattenberg, Kriss & Ham, "Talk Before You Type: Coordination in Wikipedia," HICSS 2007. doi: 10.1109/HICSS.2007.511

Rahwan, Zablith & Reed, “Laying the foundations for a World Wide Argument Web,” Artificial Intelligence 2007. doi: 10.1016/j.artint.2007.04.015

Walton, Reed & Macagno, Argumentation Schemes.

37

http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.2081



http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2007.511



http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2007.04.015


Further image credits

Slide 3 The WWW 2003-11-23 http://www.opte.org/maps/ Argument – author unknown – via via

http://blog.pappastax.com/index.php/2009/11/23/seth-godin-on-online-arguments/

Slide 4 Wikipedia logo

Slide 31 http://www.cafepress.com/+ask_dad_magnet,55304381

Talk pages screenshots from http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk: {articlename}

3838

http://www.opte.org/maps/

http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk


Most popular (article visits)

Common pattern for Featured Articles, controversial articles, too.

Wikipedia and World Wide Argument Web (DERI meeting 2010-12-03)

Technology

Transcript of Wikipedia and World Wide Argument Web (DERI meeting 2010-12-03)