Re: [Wiki-research-l] Feedback about Wikipedia-related project.

[Garcia Duran Alberto]

Hi Su,

Thanks for your questions.

Imagine you are a fan of Mollywood (a Hollywood inspired nickname for Malayalam 
Cinema) and you want to improve the article about the following movie: 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aarohanam_(1980_film)

You just watched the movie, and you want to tell the world about the argument 
of the movie. Then you create a new section named "Plot". You have an idea 
about which Wikipedia articles to include in the section, but for a whole 
picture you ask the tool for recommendations. You query -- format of the query 
is (article, section name, type of entities to suggest) -- the model to get the 
following information.

- Where was the argument of the movie supposed to happen?
Which would be translated into the query Query(Aarohanam_(1980_film), "Plot", 
Location)
Recommendations: (Kerala, Puducherry, India, Malabar Coast)

- Which topics are addressed in the plot of the movie?
Query(Aarohanam_(1980_film), "Plot", TopicalConcept)
Recommendations: (Bipolar disorder,  Poverty)

Given these recommendations and your previous knowledge you are ready to start 
editing the section!

You also know this movie had an impact on the Malayalam culture. Then you 
decide to include a new section named "Impact on the Malayalam society". As 
before, you want recommendations from the model before editing. Now you query 
the tool with
Query(Aarohanam_(1980_film), "Impact on the Malayalam society", Person)
Query(Aarohanam_(1980_film), "Impact on the Malayalam society", Event)

The model provides some suggestions to these queries. The suggestions will be 
of type Person and Event, respectively. This, along with your previous 
knowledge you are ready to start editing.

To sum up, the tool suggests Wikipedia entities to insert in the respective 
text of the section you are going to start editing for the first time. You can 
also use the tool in cases where the section already exists and it contains 
some text and links. In this case, you can check whether the section is missing 
some important entity that has been recommended by the tool.

However, one of our concerns relates to the requirement of specifying the type 
of entity (Person, Event, TopicalConcept) for which the editor wants 
recommendations. We are wondering if this requirement is limiting or not. Note 
that as indicated in our original post, the total number of entity types is in 
a manageable range (~20), and can be presented in a visual manner (using a 
dropdown list) to the editor.

Thanks!
dlab

___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Feedback about Wikipedia-related project.

[L.Gelauff]

Hi dlab,

Are you looking at articles from scratch, or articles that already exist?
If they already exist, you could perhaps derive the 'type' from the
category the article is placed in, or predict it from the lead paragraph.
If you're aiming at articles that get created in non-English (I don't know
if you're limiting yourself by language), you could also consider using the
Wikidata item associated with the article (which will almost always have
some 'instance of' defined).

As a use case, I could see this tool be helpful in the context of
translating articles, and in that case you already have an article in
another language to your avail, as well as a category tree in that
language, and an introduction paragraph. In that case, you probably don't
have to ask them what type of topic it is.

That would seem also the most likely place to implement it (but also with
the least added value maybe?). I think this kind of tool would be most
likely to be used if you can somehow fit it into a toolbox or existing
workflow.

I could also suggest to you to consider the opposite use case: detect links
that are very 'out of place': links that are likely referring to a homonym.
An example would be a biology article linking to a mathematician, where you
would have expected a link to a biologist. Or in a historical article about
someone/something in the 14th century, a link to a person in the 17th
century. This could still be a valid link, but it may be helpful to detect
these rare events - it might trigger a disambiguation. Just thinking out
loud.

Best,

Lodewijk

On Sat, Sep 19, 2020 at 1:44 PM Su-Laine Brodsky  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> A good place to get feedback from the English Wikipedia community would be
> the Village Pump Idea Lab:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(idea_lab) .
>
> It’s not clear to me whether the tool would be suggesting inline links for
> the text that’s already in the article, or “See also” links. A description
> of what problem the tool would solve would be really helpful.  It would
> also be helpful to see “before and after” mockups showing a specific stub
> article as it exists today and what the article would look like after the
> tool’s suggestions have been applied.
>
> Cheers,
> Su-Laine
> Wikipedia contributor
>
>
> > On Sep 18, 2020, at 3:30 AM, Garcia Duran Alberto 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all
> >
> > We are researchers from the dlab at EPFL working with Bob West.
> >
> > We have plans to build a graph-based ML algorithm, which will further
> facilitate development of a tool to assist Wikipedia editors by providing
> recommendations on two novel use-cases. One consists of suggesting
> hyperlinks (Wikipedia articles) to be inserted within a section of an
> article. Note that this is different from "classical link prediction".
> >
> > We feel the tool could be of great value, as it can work with newly
> created sections that do not have any content yet. What's more, the editor
> can type *any* section name (either non-existent in that article or even in
> the whole Wiki project) and the tool would have the power to suggest
> hyperlinks that are likely to be of interest for that section in the
> article. We think that (specially) stub articles can benefit from this tool.
> >
> > However, we have one assumption. In addition to the section name, the
> editor must provide the "entity type" (Place, People, Date,
> Organization...) of the Wikipedia articles she would like to insert in the
> section. The reason is that within a section you can find links to articles
> of diverse types.
> >
> > The reason we are reaching out to you is two fold:
> > (1) To check whether such a tool would be of interest and likely to be
> used by the editors.
> > (2) How limiting is the assumption that the editor needs to specify the
> entity type of the Wikipedia articles for which she needs recommendations
> from the tool?
> >
> > One one hand, some of us think this is not a problem as the number of
> entity types is relatively small (between 10 and 20) and they can be easily
> and visually presented to the editor with a dropdown list. On the other
> side, others think this requirement is limiting.
> >
> > We would like to know your opinion to decide whether we should move
> forward with this project.
> >
> > Thanks!
> > dlab
> >
> > ___
> > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>
>
> ___
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>
___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Feedback about Wikipedia-related project.

[Su-Laine Brodsky]

Hi,

A good place to get feedback from the English Wikipedia community would be the 
Village Pump Idea Lab: 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(idea_lab) . 

It’s not clear to me whether the tool would be suggesting inline links for the 
text that’s already in the article, or “See also” links. A description of what 
problem the tool would solve would be really helpful.  It would also be helpful 
to see “before and after” mockups showing a specific stub article as it exists 
today and what the article would look like after the tool’s suggestions have 
been applied. 

Cheers,
Su-Laine
Wikipedia contributor


> On Sep 18, 2020, at 3:30 AM, Garcia Duran Alberto  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi all
> 
> We are researchers from the dlab at EPFL working with Bob West.
> 
> We have plans to build a graph-based ML algorithm, which will further 
> facilitate development of a tool to assist Wikipedia editors by providing 
> recommendations on two novel use-cases. One consists of suggesting hyperlinks 
> (Wikipedia articles) to be inserted within a section of an article. Note that 
> this is different from "classical link prediction".
> 
> We feel the tool could be of great value, as it can work with newly created 
> sections that do not have any content yet. What's more, the editor can type 
> *any* section name (either non-existent in that article or even in the whole 
> Wiki project) and the tool would have the power to suggest hyperlinks that 
> are likely to be of interest for that section in the article. We think that 
> (specially) stub articles can benefit from this tool.
> 
> However, we have one assumption. In addition to the section name, the editor 
> must provide the "entity type" (Place, People, Date, Organization...) of the 
> Wikipedia articles she would like to insert in the section. The reason is 
> that within a section you can find links to articles of diverse types.
> 
> The reason we are reaching out to you is two fold:
> (1) To check whether such a tool would be of interest and likely to be used 
> by the editors.
> (2) How limiting is the assumption that the editor needs to specify the 
> entity type of the Wikipedia articles for which she needs recommendations 
> from the tool?
> 
> One one hand, some of us think this is not a problem as the number of entity 
> types is relatively small (between 10 and 20) and they can be easily and 
> visually presented to the editor with a dropdown list. On the other side, 
> others think this requirement is limiting.
> 
> We would like to know your opinion to decide whether we should move forward 
> with this project.
> 
> Thanks!
> dlab
> 
> ___
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l


___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l