The DOI matches its DataCite record.
An analysis of Wikipedia references across PLOS publications
Abstract
Analysis of the references to PLOS publications in Wikipedia as an article-level metric.
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 methodologies in previous studies used to identify the scholarly references on Wikipedia can be classified as: (1) extracting them from either page texts (Wikitexts) or Wikipedia external links; (2) detecting the pages contain them by using web search engines; and (3) analyzing usage log data.
“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 [6]
Split into 3 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 1 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredLittle is known of the editors and their contributions to the addition of scholarly references to Wikipedia.
“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 [6]
The Introduction (page unavailable) says there is insufficient data on how scholarly content is referenced in Wikipedia. The Conclusion and Discussions (page unavailable) calls for more research into editing by different users, but does not specifically say that little is known about which editors add scholarly references or their individual contributions. (LLM, conf=0.78)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredSeveral studies have been conducted regarding scholarly bibliographic references on Wikipedia; however, most of them have focused on the scholarly document itself.
“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 [6]
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
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Black, E, (2008) "Wikipedia and academic peer review: Wikipedia as a recognised medium for scholarly publication?" Online Information Review, Vol. 32 Iss: 1, pp.73 -88.
- Penev L1, Hagedorn G, Mietchen D, Georgiev T, Stoev P, Sautter G, Agosti D, Plank A, Balke M, Hendrich L, Erwin T. "Interlinking journal and wiki publications through joint citation: Working examples from ZooKeys and Plazi on Species-ID." Zookeys. 2011 Apr 14;(90):1-12. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.90.1369. · DOI
- Bilder, G. (2014, February 24). Many Metrics. Such Data. Wow. CrossTech Blog. http://crosstech.crossref.org/2014/02/many-metrics-such-data-wow.html. List of Wikipedias. (2014). Retrieved April 18, 2014, from https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias#All_Wikipedias_ordered_by_number_of_articles Cumulative ALM Report through 3/20/2014. http://article-level-metrics.plos.org/files/2012/10/alm_report_2014- 03-10.csv Wikipedia ALM Report through 3/20/2014. https://github.com/PLOS/altmetrics14- wikipedia/blob/master/data/alm_wikipedia_2014-03-10.csv
- Welch, J.J., 2010. The "Island Rule" and Deep-Sea Gastropods: Re-Examining the Evidence S. Joly, ed. PLoS ONE, 5(1), p.e8776. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0008776 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
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
- ALM, P., Fenner, M., & Lin, J.
- Venue
- figshare
- Publisher
- figshare
- Published
- 2014
- References
- 0
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
