Hi all,
The next Research Showcase, “Learning How to Correct a Knowledge Base
from the Edit History” and “TableNet: An Approach for Determining
Fine-grained Relations for Wikipedia Tables” will be live-streamed
this Wednesday, March 20, 2019, at 11:30 AM PST/18:30 UTC (Please note
the change in
The thing about sockpuppets is that we only know about the ones that have been
detected (and some of them have been large groups of 100s of accounts). The
problem is that we don’t know about the undetected ones. I am sure many of us
have had suspicions about the behaviour of certain accounts
Does anybody know how prevalent are sockpuppets? Has anybody tried
estimating the percentage of editors that have created at least one
additional account? (Legitimate or otherwise.)
Giovanni
On Mon, Mar 18, 2019, 20:20 Stuart A. Yeates wrote:
> In addition to Kerry's excellent examples there
A quick and dirty solution might be to use the hostbot list from the
teahouse at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse/Hosts/Database_reports The
list is regularly refreshed, so you could pull the account names from there
over the course of a month and then randomly select your sample,
In addition to Kerry's excellent examples there are users editing
wikipedia though TOR, the anonymity and censorship circumvention
network. These users face extra scrutiny.
cheers
stuart
--
...let us be heard from red core to black sky
On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 at 13:04, Kerry Raymond wrote:
>
>
Hi Haifeng,
Some users will state on user pages that an account is an alternate
account. However, this practice is not followed by everyone, and those who
do follow this practice aren't required to so in a uniform way.
Alternate accounts which are not labeled as such, and which are used for
