Thank you Leila, Stuart, Pine We will follow up on these comments and pointers
A few additional words about this research - Our narrow definition of formal expertise focuses on those with academic qualifications who have published a scholarly work (i.e. appears in Google Scholar) in the topic of the specific Wikipedia articles where one was active. We acknowledge that many experts do not have academic qualifications. The choice of "formal" (i.e. academic in this context) expertise enabled a concrete operationalization and measurement. We welcome any ideas for pinpointing informal experts. We are currently in the first phase of research where we try to identify these formal experts. We've spent considerable amount of time in identifying 500 such experts, and now we use machine learning techniques to automatically spot them (preliminary results are quite good). Once this is done, we can start asking interesting questions, such as: - What is the relative role of these formal experts to overall content contributed to Wikipedia? - Are formal experts' contributions "better"? (e.g. survive longer or result in increased quality score (per ORES) - Who are those formal experts? anonymous contributors? registered users? do they take additional roles within the community? - Formal experts' motivation Any other ideas for taking this research forward are more than welcome. Thank you, Ofer, Einat and Alex _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
