Jodi Schneider

From WikiPapers
Jump to: navigation, search

Jodi Schneider is an author from Ireland.

Publications

Only those publications related to wikis are shown here.
Title Keyword(s) Published in Language DateThis property is a special property in this wiki. Abstract R C
Arguments about deletion: How experience improves the acceptability of arguments in ad-hoc online task groups Argumentation schemes
Collaboration and conflict
Critical questions
Decision-making
Deliberation
Online argumentation
Peer production
Wikipedia
English 2013 Increasingly, ad-hoc online task groups must make decisions about jointly created artifacts such as open source software and Wikipedia articles. Time-consuming and laborious attention to textual discussions is needed to make such decisions, for which computer support would be beneficial. Yet there has been little study of the argumentation patterns that distributed ad-hoc online task groups use in evaluation and decision-making. In a corpus of English Wikipedia deletion discussions, we investigate the argumentation schemes used, the role of the arguer's experience, and which arguments are acceptable to the audience. We report three main results: First, the most prevalent patterns are the Rules and Evidence schemes from Walton's catalog of argumentation schemes [34], which comprise 36% of arguments. Second, we find that familiarity with community norms correlates with the novices' ability to craft persuasive arguments. Third, acceptable arguments use community-appropriate rhetoric that demonstrate knowledge of policies and community values while problematic arguments are based on personal preference and inappropriate analogy to other cases. Copyright 2013 ACM. 0 0
Alternative interfaces for deletion discussions in Wikipedia: Some proposals using decision factors Articles for deletion
Interfaces
Wikipedia
WikiSym 2012 English 2012 Content deletion is an important mechanism for maintaining quality in online communities. In Wikipedia, deletion is guided by complex procedures. Controversial cases (~12% [4]) are sent to special community discussions called "Articles for Deletion" (AfD). Deciding the outcome of these deletion debates can be difficult. Further, deletion seems to be a point of friction, which demotivates new editors without sufficiently informing them about Wikipedia's values and standards. 0 0
Building a standpoints web to support decision-making in Wikipedia Collaboration
Decision rationale
Deliberation
Online argumentation
Sensemaking
Wikipedia
English 2012 Although the Web enables large-scale collaboration, its potential to support group decision-making has not been fully exploited. My research aims to analyze, extract, and represent disagreement in purposeful social web conversations. This supports decision-making in distributed groups by representing individuals' claims and their justifications in a "Standpoints Web", a hypertext web interlinking the claims and justifications made throughout the social web. The two main contributions of my dissertation are an architecture for the Standpoints Web and a case study implementing the Standpoints Web for Wikipedia's deletion discussions. 0 0
Deletion discussions in Wikipedia: Decision factors and outcomes Articles for deletion
Collaboration and conflict
Decision-making
Factors analysis
Novices
Online argumentation
Values
Wikipedia
WikiSym 2012 English 2012 Deletion of articles is a common process in Wikipedia, in order to ensure the overall quality of the encyclopedia. Yet, there is a need to better understand the procedures in order to promote the best decisions without unnecessary community work. In this paper, we study deletion in Wikipedia, drawing from factor analysis, and taking an in-depth, content-analysis-based approach. We address three research questions: First, what factors contribute to the decision about whether to delete a given article? Second, when multiple factors are given, what is the relative importance of those factors? Third, what are the outcomes of deletion discussions, both for articles and for the community? We find that multiple factors contribute to the assessment of an article, and we discuss their relative frequency. Further, we show how the assessment timeline focuses attention on improving borderline articles that have the potential to meet Wikipedia's content inclusion policies, and we highlight the role of novice contributors in this improvement process. 0 0
Understanding and improving Wikipedia article discussion spaces Wikipedia
Collaboration
Online discussions
Semantic web
Talk page
SAC English 2011 0 1
A Content Analysis: How Wikipedia Talk Pages Are Used Web Science Conference English 2010 0 0
Enhancing mediawiki talk pages with semantics for better coordination a proposal MediaWiki
RDFa
SIOC
Talk page
Wikipedia
CEUR Workshop Proceedings English 2010 This paper presents a 15-item classification for MediaWiki Talk pages comments, associated with a new lightweight ontology that extends SIOC to represent these categories.We discuss how this ontology can enhance MediaWiki Talk pages, with RDFa, making content of such pages easier to parse and to understand. 0 0