List of bachelor's theses
This is a list of all the bachelor's theses available in WikiPapers. Currently, there are 11 bachelor's theses.
To create a new "bachelor's thesis" go to Form:Publication.
|Title||Author(s)||Keyword(s)||Published in||Language||DateThis property is a special property in this wiki.||Abstract||R||C|
|La participation contributive des publics et des personnels au musée : l’exemple du partenariat entre Wikimédia France et le Centre Pompidou||Céline Rabaud||French||May 2014||0||1|
|Assessing Article Quality in Wikipedia Using Machine Learning Algorithms||2014||0||0|
|O Discurso de Verdade na Wikipédia como Ferramenta de Comunicação de Marketing||Michelle Modesto||Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro||Portuguese||2013||0||0|
|Die Entwicklung von Qualitätsmängeln in der Wikipedia anhand von Wartungsbausteinen||Matthias Busse||Bauhaus-University Weimar||German||2012||0||0|
|Featured Article Identification in Wikipedia||Christian Fricke||Bauhaus-Universität Weimar, Germany||English||2012||Over the last decade, a variety of quality indicators have been introduced in an effort to automatically assess the quality of content created by collaborative communities such as Wikipedia. The effectiveness of the indicators has been tested by means of classifying featured and non-featured articles. In this thesis, we provide a comprehensive summary of the article features found in the relevant literature. Furthermore, we analyze several of the presented classification algorithms on uniform datasets for a fair assessment of the respective performance. We compare our results to the ones presented in the various studies and show which prove to be the most effective.||0||0|
|Coerência entre princípios e práticas na Wikipédia Lusófona: uma análise semiótica||Paulo Henrique Souto Maior Serrano||Wikipedia
Communities of Practice
|Portuguese||July 2011||This paper presents the method, the analysis and the results of a study that examined the operation dynamics and consistency between the guidelines of conduct and practice of editing at the Lusophone version of Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. This work uses information and content published under the Creative Commons / Share alike 3.0 that indicates the need to distribute the resulting work under the same license. The online encyclopedia can be freely changed by users that browse its contents. Discussions on the permanence or alteration of information published are held in a special discussion page where people can argue about the differences of opinion and reach consensus. This process occurs from cognitive and pragmatic sanctions given to themes and figures that make up the thematic isotopy of users enunciation. The identification of these elements in this dissertation, was carried out by Greimas' semiotics. Sanctions should pragmatically represent the guidelines of the collaborative process on Wikipedia, but there are institutionalized rules that are presented to users as the five pillars of Wikipedia. The five pillars are about the encyclopedism, neutral point of view, free license, community conviviality and liberality in the rules. The statute assigns values to the practice of encyclopedias and information that are published by them. These values were defined by tensive semiotics and compared with the cognitive and pragmatic sanctions of the isotopies enunciated by users, to check the consistency between what is being requested by Wikipedia and what is being done by their contributors. The results of this comparison show some similarities and differences between discourse and practice, indicating ownership of Wikipedia by its users and the need for more accuracy and criteria in conflicting issues or controversies for the permanence of information on the page entry. The verifiability of the information was presented as a greatly appreciated theme by users, indicating the importance of the veracity of reference sources and the verification of information. The freedoms and distribution of powers introduced by the principles are denied on the practice of editing. Wikipedia presented itself as a very liberal and tolerant encyclopedia, giving substance to the collaboration, but, in practice, very restrictive and careful when it comes to the permanence of a content in the article page.||4||1|
|Um método automático para estimativa da qualidade de enciclopédias colaborativas on-line: um estudo de caso sobre a Wikipédia||Daniel Hasan Dalip||Quality Assessment
|Portuguese||April 2009||The old dream of a universal repository containing all the human knowledge and culture is becoming possible through the Internet and the Web. Moreover, this is happening with the direct collaborative, participation of people. Wikipedia is a great example. It is an enormous repository of information with free access and edition, created by the community in a collaborative manner. However, this large amount of information, made available democratically and virtually without any control, raises questions about its relative quality. In this work we explore a significant number of quality indicators, some of them proposed by us and used here for the first time, and study their capability to assess the quality of Wikipedia articles. Furthermore, we explore machine learning techniques to combine these quality indicators into one single assessment judgment. Through experiments, we show that the most important quality indicators are the easiest ones to extract on a open digital library, namely, textual features related to length, structure and style. We were also able to determine which indicators did not contribute significantly to the quality assessment. These were, coincidentally, the most complex features, such as those based on link analysis. Finally, we compare our combination method with state-of-the-art solutions and show significant improvements in terms of effective quality prediction.||11||0|
|Automatic Edit-War Detection in Wikipedia||Dennis Hoppe||Bauhaus-University Weimar||German||2008||0||0|
|Análise do verbete da Wikipédia sob a ótica da teoria de gênero como ação social||Vanessa Wendhausen Lima||Wikipedia Entry
|Portuguese||2007||This study aims to analyze the Wikipedia entry. The analysis is based upon the theory of genre as a social action as proposed by Miller (1994a) and her follower Bazerman (1994). These authors state that the notion of genre is a typified social action that functions as a reply to recurrent situations. Methodological proposals for the study of the Wikipedia entry composition process are given by Paré and Smart (1994). They believe that a genre analysis based on Miller‟s theory should identify which elements are observable besides textual ones and which is the relationship between them. Therefore, the analysis of the textual elements was based on the rhetorical movements, the compositional aspects of the entry, the text format, and the social roles of the writers. This study reveals that the Wikipedia entry is a digital genre resulting from a social act which involves the whole free encyclopedia. It took this form because of the recurrence and text typifying through the rules that regulate the free encyclopedia process of writing.||2||0|
|Wikipedia – informationspublicering på Internet ur ett genus- och maktperspektiv||Karolina Samuelsson
|Swedish||2007||Title in English: Wikipedia – Internet publishing from a gender- and power perspective.
This essay is about publishing on the Internet and aims to understand the differences between publishing information on the webpage Wikipedia (Swedish version) in contrast to other in-formation pages on the Internet, for example blog, discussion pages, homepages etcetera. The study is based upon an article which described that 90% of the information publishers at Wi-kipedia belongs to a small elite of white, western, well educated men between the age of thirty to thirty-three. This study examines why people who does not belong to this heteronormativi-ty publish information in other Internet places but not at Wikipedia.Wikipedia is an open source site, where anyone can publish and are even encouraged to do so and is often described as an utopian dream of the digital democracy, so why don´t people ex-press themselves on Wikipedia? The method is based on two discussion groups, which are compared and analyzed. The study is based upon theoretical competence within feminist theory and conceptions such as intersectionality, heteronormativity and digital divide as well as theories about digital devices and social order. The analyses concluded that Wikipedias structure restrains people from contributing with information on the site, that is understand to be associated with true and objective information and prestige. It is also compared to the printed encyclopedia which also strengthens this understanding. And when people publish information in other coherences it is based upon their own understanding, and this require-ment for true and objective information at Wikipedia hinder many.