用戶:井上麻雀喵/沙盒

關於高熱度時事的新條目更有可能是惡作劇

一篇名為《網絡熱度在維基百科上的虛假信息中扮演的角色》（The role of online attention in the supply of disinformation in Wikipedia） 的研究發現：

[...]相較於同一時間創立的合規條目，[在英語維基百科上的]惡作劇條目往往和被創立之前的流量高峰有關。這與認為虛假信息或是誤導性內容的創立是由話題所收穫的關注度所驅動的這一想法是吻合的。[... 作者們希望這項發現]可以幫助提高維基百科上的知識的可信度。

圖為歷年來創建後被發現的惡作劇新條目。作者順便提到：「大多數惡作劇出現在2005年至2007年期間，之後開始下降。觀察到這種的行為一部分上可以通過維基百科社群於2007年11月開始巡查新頁面這件事來解釋[...]，並且其與英語維基百科社群活動的廣為人知的高峰期是一致的。」

作者指出，研究文獻中對於維基百科惡作劇的研究甚少——在此篇論文之前只有一篇以此為主題的論文（一篇由Kumar等人著於2016年的論文報告說：「雖然大多數惡作劇會很快被發現並對維基百科產生很少的影響，但仍有少數惡作劇長期存在並在網絡上廣泛引用。」）。與之前的研究相比（那篇研究獲取了更多更廣的刪除條目的新頁面巡查數據），本篇的作者們則是基於（英文維基百科）社群整理出的惡作劇列表進行了分析。

在探討關於網絡關注度與虛假信息之間的關係的主要研究問題（以維基百科頁面訪問量為操作指標）之前，作者（在其初始修訂版中）對這些已確認的惡作劇條目與一組於同日創建的非惡作劇條目在各種內容特徵上的差異進行了分析並得出了結論：

[...]惡作劇條目一般比正常條目含有更多純文本，並且維基百科含有較少的外部連結。這意味着非惡作劇條目更常引用維基百科外的來源。這種行為是可預見的，因為惡作劇的作者需要花費大量精力才能來製作惡作劇能夠指向的外部資源。

也就是說，成功的惡作劇者可能表現出了一種反全文偏誤。

為了量化一篇條目所涉及的主題相關領域的關注度（即使是在條目創建之前），作者們使用了對「維基連結鄰居」的觀察：

如果兩個維基百科條目之間存在着連結，就說明它們在語義上有着關聯。因此，這些相鄰條目的流量便給我們提供了一個用於大致地衡量在新的[維基百科條目]被創建之前某個主題的在線關注度的指標。

為了了解惡作劇的創建與其相關主題所受到的關注之間的關係的性質，我們首先要量化創建那天前後相對的關注量變化。於此，一個主題被定義為條目內容中所連結到的所有（非惡作劇）「鄰居」，也就是它的（非惡作劇）對外連結。

這個「關注量變化」是通過計算相鄰條目的頁面訪問量的中位數變化來得出的。其使用的時間跨度為條目創建的七天前到七天後，以將「關注度的短期激增和每周流量的變化」納入考量（相對於之前的一些關於維基百科上的流量的研究而言，這是一種相對簡單的進行時間序列分析的方法）。作者們被局限於一個較舊的、僅覆蓋了2007年至2016年的頁面訪問量數據集，並導致了分析的樣本被限制在了83個惡作劇上。其中，有75個惡作劇的相關主題的關注度變化比和它們同一天創立的非惡作劇條目的主題的關注度變化更大。儘管樣本規模相對較小，但這一研究仍是被認為具有統計學意義的。總而言之，這表明了「維基百科中的惡作劇的產生與先前以在線關注度的形式體現的信息消費有關」。

第230條款巋然不動，維基百科vs.英國法案，信息有誤再遭指責

維基百科的可信度轉變

在一篇有趣的於APSR（American Political Science Review）上發佈並被總結於Political Science Now上的文章中，作者Sverrir Steinsson對英文維基百科在可信度上不斷進步的歷程進行了探索——維基百科，一個原本容許偽科學和陰謀論的平台，已然轉變為了揭穿迷信的強大力量。經過內部鬥爭、政策詮釋的變化和編者的離去，維基百科已經成為了事實信息的可信來源。這是一段引人入勝的旅程：這證明了即使是最為放蕩不羈的機構也能為了更好的明天做出改變。

通過對涵蓋氣候、健康、性別和性取向等各種內容的維基百科條目進行廣泛分析，Steinsson展示了條目內容和用語隨着時間的推移發生的顯著變化。英文維基百科從容納邊緣學說到積極拆穿迷信的轉變是一個漸進但重要的過程。例如，英文維基百科的順勢療法的條目中對其的描述便從「有爭議的替代醫學體系」逐漸演變成了明確的「偽科學」。

Steinsson審視了維基百科的治理結構，稱這些底層編輯上的權力鬥爭和辯論塑造了平台的發展軌跡。隨着持反邊緣觀點的編輯獲得影響力，支持邊緣觀點的貢獻者逐漸離開了維基百科，而維基百科的中立觀點準則出現了新的解釋。如今，事實準確性的重要性超過了廣泛觀點的多樣性，並最終增強了維基百科的可信度。對於Steinsson來說，這種變化是通過內部過程逐漸發生的，包括早期爭議的解決、某些編輯人員的離職和規則詮釋的演變。制裁持邊緣異議者的強制力和削弱了某些規則詮釋的正當性的生產力的雙重作用產生了維基百科可信度上升的這種模式。這種模式的變化可能有着更廣泛的運用，例如幫助解釋其他機構和背景中類似的轉變（例如政治運動和政黨）。

該文章挑戰了外部事件或外部來源的變化是這一轉變的主要推動力的觀點。相反，它指出內部對制度規範的重新解釋是維基百科演變的推動力。在社交媒體和在線參與佔主導地位的時代，維基百科的案例證明了動態數字平台適應和改進的潛力。這篇敘述揭示了內部衝突、政策解釋的演變和編輯環境的重塑之間的相互作用，提供了對機構可塑性的發人深省的探索。

概要

• Punting: 美國法律中的第230條款保護了網站所有者不因第三方發表的內容而承擔法律責任，並構成了維基百科和其他很多科技公司維持網站不被關閉的法律基石。美國的兩大政黨都認為該法律需要被修改，但一如既往地在具體內容上有着分歧。而最近，美國最高法院的兩樁案件更是把這些問題搬上了台面：美國最高法院判決認為企業的網站被用於發佈內容並不足以代表他們有義務防止恐怖主義行為。 The SCOTUS ruling said that the companies could not be expected to have prevented terrorist acts merely based on their websites having been used to make posts, reaffirming precedent for the protections of Section 230. The Hill reported the story in 『』Supreme Court punts Section 230 debate back to Congress』』 .
• OpenAI：被維基百科所啟發: Reuters reports how OpenAI, the company behind the Generative Pre-trained Transformer family of large language models, is exploring the concept of collective decision-making similar to Wikipedia's model, where diverse views come together to agree on content. This comes as one of several proposals by the company to increase regulatory barriers to the development of neural networks, including licensure requirements.
• Wikipedia's Wacky Footballer Fails: An article on Planet Football highlights the creation of a Twitter account dedicated to sharing side-splittingly awkward footballer photos sourced from Wikipedia articles.
• Notable Notability Fail?: Billy Penn brings up the existence of a Wikipedia page for Philadelphia's "French Quarter," highlighting its lack of detailed information and potential failure to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for geographic features. "The designation has been around 24 years, but nobody calls it that anymore — if they ever did." Sources in the article make it clear the designation was a late 90s publicity campaign by the city: Arguably notable as an attempt to advertise Philadelphia, but given it was "based on the establishment of three French restaurants and a creperie in the area in the 1990s", one can't help but feel that we're not the ones that should be mocked here.
• Feud Continues – Wikipedia Page Update Pending: The Wikipedia page about the musical group Oasis may need another update as Noel and Liam Gallagher's ongoing feud takes a bitter turn. After a tabloid report fueled hopes of a reunion, Noel called Liam a "coward" for not reaching out to discuss it. In response, Liam fired back, referencing past controversies and accusing Noel of insensitivity. According to an article on 1057ThePoint.com, it seems the Oasis Wikipedia page is destined for further revisions – as it stands right now the article states 2025 as a year the band will be active. Whatever.
• In Defense of Comprehensive Reading: Arts writer Dion Everett, in a thought-provoking piece for Varsity, sheds light on the pitfalls of clickbait-driven book criticism and the reliance on summaries and Wikipedia entries. Everett aptly emphasizes that these sources fall short in capturing the nuanced essence and depth of a book, although an image sourced from Wikimedia Commons accompanies the article.
• Green is the New Black: Sultan Al Jaber, the CEO of Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC) and the host of the COP28 climate conference in the United Arab Emirates, is facing criticism as his team is accused of paid editing of Wikipedia pages. The edits were made to Al Jaber's own Wikipedia page and COP28. The Centre for Climate Reporting and The Guardian conducted an investigation that uncovered these edits. The appointment of an oil executive as the conference chair has raised concerns, with figures like Caroline Lucas from the Green Party criticizing the influence of oil companies and their CEOs on global climate conferences.
• Wikipedia Rejects UK Age Verification Bill: In TechCity this week we can read that Wikimedia Foundation has announced its refusal to comply with the age verification requirements outlined in the UK's Online Safety Bill, citing incompatibility with its content moderation and user verification model. This decision raises concerns about the possible shutdown of Wikipedia in the UK, as the bill mandates robust age checks for sites featuring "pornography". It will not be the first country, nor the last.
• Webcomic xkcd did it again: Please see Meryl Streep seagull incident (disambiguation).
• Jimmy Wales Interview: In a podcast interview, Jimmy Wales and Stewart Baker discuss the sustainability of Wikipedia's model, address claims of bias, and explore the opportunities and risks presented by AI models like ChatGPT for the online encyclopedia.
• Music Company Goes Off-Key: TorrentFreak writes that a small music company targets a Wikipedia article in its effort to combat YouTube ripping sites, by requesting Google to delist the Comparison of YouTube downloaders page. The delisting battle between music industry groups and YouTube downloaders continues, even raising questions about the presence of explanatory content on Wikipedia.
• Wikipedia's Spanish Version Gets a Makeover: Despite not being the only version of Wikipedia to get a makeover, the Spanish edition has gained attention in an article by La Diaria, which highlights the recent aesthetic changes from Vector 2022 aimed at enhancing the user experience and streamlining navigation and search functionality. The redesign features a cleaner appearance, an improved search bar, and seamless switching between different language versions of articles. These updates were implemented based on extensive feedback and discussions. In case you missed the opportunity to provide feedback, do not fret — 2010 Vector is still an option for you.
• Russian fork: ixbt.com and many others report on Рувики ("Ruwiki"), a new Russian Wikipedia fork. For more information on planned replacements for the Russian Wikipedia see previous coverage. For even more information see this issue's News and notes.