The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Scientific citations in Wikipedia
Abstract
The Internet-based encyclopaedia Wikipedia has grown to become one of the most visited Web sites on the Internet, but critics have questioned the quality of entries. An empirical study of Wikipedia found errors in a 2005 sample of science entries. Biased coverage and lack of sources are among the "Wikipedia risks." This paper describes a simple assessment of these aspects by examining the outbound links from Wikipedia articles to articles in scientific journals with a comparison against journal statistics from Journal Citation Reports such as impact factors. The results show an increasing use of structured citation markup and good agreement with citation patterns seen in the scientific literature though with a slight tendency to cite articles in high-impact journals such as Nature and Science. These results increase confidence in Wikipedia as a reliable information resource for science in general.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Several studies have been conducted regarding scholarly bibliographic references on Wikipedia; however, most of them have focused on the scholarly document itself2–6.”
From Dataset of first appearances of the scholarly bibliographic references on Wikipedia articles (2022) · cites this paper as [2]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The methodologies in previous studies used to identify the scholarly references on Wikipedia can be classified as follows: (1) extracting them from either page texts (Wikitexts) or Wikipedia external links2–4, (2) detecting the pages contain them by using web search engines5, and (3) analyzing usage log data6.”
From Dataset of first appearances of the scholarly bibliographic references on Wikipedia articles (2022) · cites this paper as [2]
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Hence, little is known of the editors and their contributions to the addition of scholarly references to Wikipedia.”
From Dataset of first appearances of the scholarly bibliographic references on Wikipedia articles (2022) · cites this paper as [2]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Internet encyclopaedias go head to head
Giles, J. (2005) · Nature · doi:10.1038/438900a · Cited by 1,978
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- Denning, P., Horning, J., Parnas, D., and Weinstein, L. Wikipedia risks. Comm. ACM 48, 152 December (2005).
- Kleinberg, J. M. Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. J. ACM 46, 604-632 (1999).
- Bellomi, F. and Bonato, R. Network analysis of Wikipedia. In Proceedings of Wiki- mania 2005 -The First International Wikimedia Conference, (2005).
- Neus, A. Managing information quality in virtual communities of practice. In Pro- ceedings of the 6th International Conference on Information Quality at MIT, Pierce, E. and Katz-Haas, R., editors (Sloan School of Management, Boston, MA, 2001).
- Zeng, H., Alhossaini, M., Ding, L., Fikes, R., and McGuinness, D. L. Computing trust from revision history. In Proceedings of the 2006 International Conference on Privacy, Security and Trust, October (2006).
- Adler, B. T. and de Alfaro, L. A content-driven reputation system for the Wikipedia. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth International World Wide Web Con- ference (WWW2007) May 8-12, 2007 Banff, Alberta, CANADA, 261+, (2007).
- Lawrence, S. Free online availability substantially increases a paper's impact. Nature 411, 521 (2001).
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Do Altmetrics Work? Twitter and Ten Other Social Web Services
Thelwall, M., Haustein, S., Larivière, V., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0064841 · Cited by 907
Getting to the source: where does Wikipedia get its information from?
Ford, H., Sen, S., Musicant, D. R., & Miller, N. (2013) · Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on Open Collaboration · doi:10.1145/2491055.2491064 · Cited by 36
Nicholson, J. M., Uppala, A., Sieber, M., Grabitz, P., Mordaunt, M., & Rife, S. C. (2021) · The FEBS Journal · doi:10.1111/febs.15608 · Cited by 22
Dataset of first appearances of the scholarly bibliographic references on Wikipedia articles
Kikkawa, J., Takaku, M., & Yoshikane, F. (2022) · Scientific Data · doi:10.1038/s41597-022-01190-z · Cited by 4
Kikkawa, J., Takaku, M., & Yoshikane, F. (2023) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-28032-0_33
Metadata
- Authors
- Nielsen, F. A.
- Venue
- First Monday
- Publisher
- University of Illinois Libraries
- Published
- 2007-08-06
- ISSN
- 1396-0466
- Cited by
- 61
- References
- 1
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
