Defying easy categorization: Wikipedia as primary, secondary and tertiary resource

Caroline Ball

doi:10.1629/uksg.604

Abstract

Wikipedia is the world’s largest information source, used daily by millions of individuals around the world – yet such is its uniqueness and dominance that rarely is the question asked: what exactly is Wikipedia? This article sets out to explore the different categories of source that Wikipedia could be defined as (primary, secondary or tertiary) alongside the varied ways in which Wikipedia is used, which defy easy categorization, exemplified by a broad-ranging literature review and focusing on the English language Wikipedia. It concludes that Wikipedia cannot easily be categorized in any information category but is defined instead by the ways it is used and interpreted by its users.

References

“Wikimedia Foundation,” Wikipedia, last modified 6 September 2022, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation (accessed 3 February 2023).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
“Size comparisons,” Wikipedia, last modified 8 May 2022, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Size_comparisons (accessed 3 February 2023).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
“Size of Wikipedia,” Wikipedia, last modified 21 September 2022, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Size_of_Wikipedia (accessed 3 February 2023).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Jim Giles, “Internet encyclopaedias go head to head,” Nature 438 (2005): 900–901, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/438900a (accessed 3 February 2023); Andrew J. Flanagin and Miriam J. Metzger, “From Encyclopædia Britannica to Wikipedia,” Information, Communication & Society 14, no.3 (2011): 355–374, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2010.542823 (accessed 3 February 2023); Marcus Messner and Marcia W. DiStaso, “Wikipedia versus Encyclopedia Britannica: A longitudinal analysis to identify the impact of social media on the standards of knowledge,” Mass Communication and Society 16, no.4 (2013): 465–486, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2012.732649 (accessed 3 February 2023); Shane Greenstein and Feng Zhu, “Do experts or crowd-based models produce more bias? Evidence from Encyclopedia Britannica and Wikipedia,” MIS Quarterly 42, no.3 (2018): 945–959, DOI: 10.25300/MISQ/2018/14084 (accessed 3 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Xuemei Li, Mike Thelwall, and Ehsan Mohammadi, “How are encyclopedias cited in academic research? Wikipedia, Britannica, Baidu Baike, and Scholarpedia,” Profesional de la información 30, no. 5 (2021), DOI: https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2021.sep.08 (accessed 3 February 2023); Diana E. Park and Laurie M. Bridges, “Meet students where they are: centering Wikipedia in the classroom,” Communications in Information Literacy 16, no.1 (2022): 4–23, DOI: 10.15760/comminfolit.2022.16.1.2 (accessed 3 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Caroline Ball, “WikiLiteracy: enhancing students’ digital literacy with Wikipedia”, Journal of Information Literacy 13, no.2 (2019): 253–271, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11645/13.2.2669 (accessed 3 February 2023); Stuart T. Fraser, “A new frontier: Developing an undergraduate assessment task aimed at improving the representation of biomedical scientific information on Wikipedia,” Studies in Higher Education 45, no.5 (2020): 972–983, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2020.1749794 (accessed 3 February 2023); Matthew A. Vetter, Krista Speicher Sarraf, and Elin Woods, “Assessing the Art + feminism Edit-a-thon for Wikipedia literacy, learning outcomes, and critical thinking,” Interactive Learning Environments 30, no.6 (2020): 1155–1167, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1805772 (accessed 3 February 2023); Paul Anthony Thomas et al., “Using Wikipedia to teach scholarly peer review,” Journal of Information Literacy 15, no.2 (2021): 178–190, DOI: 10.11645/15.2.2913 (accessed 3 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Xiaozan Lyu and Rodrigo Costas, “How do academic topics shift across altmetric sources? A case study of the research area of Big Data,” Scientometrics 123 (2020): 909–943, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03415-7 (accessed 3 February 2023); Anna Tovo et al., “Upscaling human activity data: A statistical ecology approach,” PLOS ONE 16, no.7 (2021): e0253461, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253461 (accessed 3 February 2023); Mengting Song et al., “Research on methods of parsing and classification of internet super large-scale texts,” Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1757, no.1 (2021): 012121, DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/1757/1/012121 (accessed 3 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Padma Polash Paul et al., “Editing behavior to recognize authors of crowdsourced content,” 2015 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (2015): 1676–1681, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/SMC.2015.295 (accessed 3 February 2023); Effie Kapsalis, “Wikidata: Recruiting the crowd to power access to digital archives,” Journal of Radio & Audio Media 26, no.1 (2019): 134–142, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/19376529.2019.1559520 (accessed 3 February 2023); Natalia Banasik-Jemielniak, Dariusz Jemielniak, and Maciej Wilamowski, “Psychology and Wikipedia: Measuring psychology journals’ impact by Wikipedia citations,” Social Science Computer Review 40, no.3 (2021): 756–774, DOI: 10.1177/0894439321993836 (accessed 3 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Alexander Stinson, Sandra Fauconnier, and Liam Wyatt, “Stepping beyond libraries: the changing orientation in global GLAM-Wiki,” Italian Journal of Library, Archives and Information Science 3, no.9 (2018): 16–34, DOI: https://doi.org/10.4403/jlis.it-12480 (accessed 3 February 2023); Trilce Navarrete and Elena Villaespesa, “Image-based information: Paintings in Wikipedia,” Journal of Documentation 77, no.2 (2021): 359–380, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-03-2020-0044 (accessed 3 February 2023); Carlos H. Marcondes, “Implementing culturally relevant relationships between digital cultural heritage objects,” Metadata and Semantic Research 1355 (2021): 123–133, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-71903-6_13 (accessed 3 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mohamad Mehdi et al, “Excavating the mother lode of human-generated text: A systematic review of research that uses the Wikipedia corpus,” Information Processing & Management 53, no.2 (2017): 506, DOI: 10.1016/j.ipm.2016.07.003 (accessed 3 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
P.D. Magnus, “On trusting Wikipedia,” Episteme 6, no.1 (2012): 74, DOI: 10.3366/E1742360008000555 (accessed 6 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
“Wikipedia is a tertiary source,” Wikipedia, last modified 11 May 2022, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_a_tertiary_source (accessed 6 February 2023).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Alexander L. Bond, “Why ornithologists should embrace and contribute to Wikipedia,” Ibis 153, no.3 (2011): 640–641, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.2011.01135.x (accessed 6 February 2023); M. Dylan Bould et al., “References that anyone can edit: Review of Wikipedia citations in peer reviewed health science literature,” BMJ 348 (2014): g1585, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g1585 (accessed 6 February 2023); Trudi E. Jacobson, “Analyzing information sources through the lens of the ACRL framework: A case study of Wikipedia,” Communications in Information Literacy 14, no. 2 (2020): 362–377, DOI: https://doi.org/10.15760/comminfolit.2020.14.2.10 (accessed 6 February 2023); Gwinyai Masukume, “Why and how medical schools, peer-reviewed journals, and research funders should promote Wikipedia editing,” Studies in Higher Education 45, no.5 (2020): 984–989, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2020.1749796 (accessed 6 February 2023); Jiawei Xing and Matthew Vetter, “Editing for equity: Understanding instructor motivations for integrating cross-disciplinary Wikipedia assignments,” First Monday 25, no.6 (2020): DOI: 10.5210/fm.v25i6.10575 (accessed 6 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Sheela Durai, “Building blocks: The art and science of searching the literature,” Indian Journal of Continuing Nursing Education 21, no.2 (2020): 193–197, DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/IJCN.IJCN_140_20 p.194 (accessed 6 February 2023).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Basawaraj Malipatil and Vaishali Pandit, “Information sources,” in Redesigning and Reimagining Libraries in New Technological Era, eds. Priya Rai, Akash Singh, Dr. Arjun, Shivjee Prasad and Vaibhav Bansal (New Delhi: Vidit Publication House, 2020), 62–73.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Montathar Faraon et al., “Fake news and aggregated credibility: conceptualizing a co-creative medium for evaluation of sources online,” International Journal of Ambient Computing and Intelligence 11, no.4 (2020): 93–117, DOI: 10.4018/IJACI.20201001.oa1 (accessed 6 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
“Core content policies,” Wikipedia, last modified 03 May 2022, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Core_content_policies (accessed 6 February 2023).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
“Notability,” Wikipedia, last modified 2 September 2022, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability (accessed 6 February 2023).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Maude Gauthier and Kim Sawchuk, “Not notable enough: Feminism and expertise in Wikipedia,” Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies 14, no.4 (2017): 385–402, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14791420.2017.1386321 (accessed 6 February 2023); Victoria Leonard and Sarah E. Bond, “Advancing feminism online,” Studies in Late Antiquity 3, no.1 (2019): 4–16, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/sla.2019.3.1.4 (accessed 6 February 2023); Amanda Menking and Jon Rosenberg, “WP:NOT, WP:NPOV, and other stories Wikipedia tells us: A feminist critique of Wikipedia’s epistemology,” Science, Technology, & Human Values 46, no.3 (2020): 455–479, DOI: 10.1177/0162243920924783 (accessed 6 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Casper Grathwohl, “Wikipedia comes of age,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, January 17, 2011, https://www.chronicle.com/article/wikipedia-comes-of-age/ (accessed 6 February 2023).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
William Cronon, “Scholarly authority in a Wikified world,” Perspectives on History, February 1, 2012, https://www.historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/february-2012/scholarly-authority-in-a-wikified-world (accessed 6 February 2023).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
William Badke, “What to do with Wikipedia,” Information Today 32, no.2 (2008), https://www.infotoday.com/online/mar08/Badke.shtml (accessed 6 February 2023).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Tiziano Piccardi et al., “Quantifying engagement with citations on Wikipedia,” Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020 (2020): 2365–2376, DOI: 10.1145/3366423.3380300 (access 6 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Tiziano Piccardi et al., “On the value of Wikipedia as a gateway to the web,” Proceedings of the Web Conference 2021 (2021): 249–260, DOI: 10.1145/3442381.3450136 (accessed 6 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
User:MusikAnimal, User:Kaldari and User:Mforns, “Siteviews Analysis,” accessed 23 September, 2022, https://pageviews.wmcloud.org/siteviews/?platform=all-access&source=pageviews&agent=user&start=2021-09&end=2022-08&sites=en.wikipedia.org.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
“No original research”, Wikipedia, last modified 10 September 2022, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research (accessed 6 February 2023).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Greenstein and Zhu, “Do experts or crowd-based models produce more bias?”, 945–959.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bould et al., “References that anyone can edit”, g1585.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Jed Meers, Jenny Gibbons, and Wendy Laws, “Research magpies: Student sourcing behaviours on an undergraduate law degree,” Teaching in Higher Education 27, no.3 (2020): 387–402, DOI: 10.1080/13562517.2020.1725460 (accessed 6 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Charles Knight and Sam Pryke, “Wikipedia and the University, a case study,” Teaching in Higher Education 17, no.6 (2012): 649–659, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2012.666734 (accessed 6 February 2023); Mónica Colón-Aguirre and Rachel A. Fleming-May, “‘You just type in what you are looking for’: undergraduates’ use of library resources vs. Wikipedia,” The Journal of Academic Librarianship 38, no. 6 (2012): 391–399, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2012.09.013 (accessed 6 February 2023); Marte Blikstad-Balas, “‘You get what you need’: A study of students’ attitudes towards using Wikipedia when doing school assignments,” Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 60, no.6 (2016): 594–608, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2015.1066428 (accessed 6 February 2023); Wazzuha Amina, Nosheen Fatima Warraich, and Amara Malik, “Usage of and learning from Wikipedia: a study of university students in Pakistan,” Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication 70, no.3 (2012): 282–292, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-04-2020-0042 (accessed 6 February 2023); Kevin Dadaczynski et al., “Digital health literature and web-based information-seeking behaviours of university students in Germany during the Covid-19 pandemic: cross-sectional survey study,” Journal of Medical Internet Research 23, no.1 (2012): e24097, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/24097 (accessed 6 February 2023); Wazzuha Amina and Nosheen Fatima Warraich, “Use and trustworthiness of Wikipedia information: student” perceptions and reflections,” Digital Library Perspectives 38, no.1 (2022): 16–32, DOI: 10.1108/DLP-04-2021-0030 (accessed 6 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Neil Selwyn and Stephen Gorard, “Students’ use of Wikipedia as an academic resource—Patterns of use and perceptions of usefulness,” The Internet and Higher Education 28 (2016): 28–34, DOI: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.08.004 (accessed 6 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Terry Judd and Gregor Kennedy, “Expediency-based practice? Medical students’ reliance on Google and Wikipedia for biomedical inquiries,” British Journal of Educational Technology 42, no.2 (2011): 351–360, DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01019.x (accessed 6 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Brian McKenzie et al., “From poetry to Palmerstown: using Wikipedia to teach critical skills and information literacy in a first-year seminar,” College Teaching 66, no.3 (2018): 140–147, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2018.1463504 (accessed 6 February 2023); Laurie Bridges and Meghan L. Dowell, “A perspective on Wikipedia: Approaches for educational use,” The Journal of Academic Librarianship 46, no.1 (2020): 102090, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2019.102090 (accessed 6 February 2023); Caroline Ball, “Using Wikipedia to explore issues of systemic bias and symbolic annihilation in information sources,” in Critical Library Pedagogy in Practice, eds., Elizabeth Brookbank and Jess Haigh (Huddersfield: Innovative Libraries Press, 2021), 194–222, https://repository.derby.ac.uk/item/92202/using-wikipedia-to-explore-issues-of-systemic-bias-and-symbolic-annihilation-in-information-sources (accessed 14 February 2023); Brooke A. Ackerly and Kristin Michelitch, “Wikipedia and political science: addressing systematic biases with student initiatives,” PS: Political Science & Politics 55, no.2 (2022): 42–433, DOI: 10.1017/S1049096521001463 (accessed 6 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Robert Tomaszewski and Karen I. MacDonald, “A study of citations to Wikipedia in scholarly publications,” Science & Technology Libraries 35, no.3 (2016): 246–261, DOI: 10.1080/0194262X.2016.1206052 (accessed 6 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Alireza Noruzi, “Wikipedia popularity from a citation analysis point of view,” Webology 6, no.2 (2009): 1–3, http://www.webology.org/2009/v6n2/editorial20.htm; Bradley Brazzeal, “Citations to Wikipedia in chemistry journals: A preliminary study,” Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship 67 (2011), DOI: https://doi.org/10.29173/istl1527 (accessed 6 February 2023); Taemin Kim Park, “The visibility of Wikipedia in scholarly publications,” First Monday 16, no. 8 (2011), DOI: https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v16i8.3492 (accessed 6 February 2023); Sarah Huggett, “The influence of free encyclopaedias on science,” Research Trends 1, no.27 (2007): 7–10, https://www.researchtrends.com/researchtrends/vol1/iss27/3/ (accessed 6 February 2023); Chitu Okoli et al., “The people’s encyclopedia under the gaze of the sages: A systematic review of scholarly research on Wikipedia,” SSRN Electronic Journal (2012), DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2021326 (accessed 6 February 2023); Sayed-Amir Marashi et al., “Impact of Wikipedia on citation trends,” EXCLI Journal 12 (2013): 15–19, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4803015/ (accessed 6 February 2023); Fariba Tohidinasab and Hamid R. Jamali, “Why and where Wikipedia is cited in journal articles?,” Journal of Scientometric Research 2, no.3 (2013): 231–238, DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/2320-0057.135415 (accessed 6 February 2023); Bould et al., “References that anyone can edit,” g1585; Robert Tomaszewski and Karen I. MacDonald, “A study of citations to Wikipedia in scholarly publications,” 246–261.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bould et al., “References that anyone can edit”, g1585.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Robert Tomaszewski and Karen I. MacDonald, “A study of citations to Wikipedia in scholarly publications,” 246–261. DOI: 10.1080/0194262X.2016.1206052
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Amber Lynn Wagner, “Wikipedia made law? The federal judicial citation of Wikipedia,” UIC John Marshall Journal of Information Technology & Privacy Law 26, no.2 (2008): 229–258, https://repository.law.uic.edu/jitpl/vol26/iss2/2/ (accessed 6 February 2023); Daniel Baker-Jones, “Citations to Wikipedia in law reviews,” U of Houston Law Center, no.2009-A-42 (2009): DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1525619 (accessed 6 February 2023); Lee Peoples, “The citation of Wikipedia in judicial opinions,” Yale Journal of Law and Technology 12 (2009): 1–50, https://openyls.law.yale.edu/handle/20.500.13051/7765 (accessed 6 February 2023); Joseph L. Gerken, “How courts use Wikipedia,” Journal of Appellate Practice and Process, 11 no.1 (2010): 191–227, https://journals.librarypublishing.arizona.edu/appellate/article/id/2705/download/pdf/ (accessed 6 February 2023); Jason C. Miller and Hannah B. Murray, “Wikipedia in court: when and how citing Wikipedia and other consensus websites is appropriate,” St John’s Law Review 84, no.2 (2010): 633–656, https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/lawreview/vol84/iss2/2/; Solomon Rukundo, “Wikipedia in the courts: An examination of the citation of Wikipedia in judicial opinions in Uganda,” Computer Law & Security Review 35, no.5 (2019): 105316, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2019.03.010 (accessed 6 February 2023); Neil Thompson et al., “Trial by internet: a randomized field experiment on Wikipedia’s influence on judges’ legal reasoning,” in Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Jurisprudence, ed., Kevin Tobia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2022), DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.4174200 (accessed 6 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Joseph L. Gerken, “How courts use Wikipedia,” 191–227.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Daniel Baker-Jones, “A jester’s promenade: citations to Wikipedia in law reviews, 2002–2008,” I/S: A Journal of Law and Policy for the Information Society 7, no.2 (2012): 361–404, https://kb.osu.edu/handle/1811/72992?show=full (accessed 6 February 2023).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Amber Lynn Wagner, “Wikipedia made law? The federal judicial citation of Wikipedia,” 229–258.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Jona Kräenbring et al., “Accuracy and completeness of drug information in Wikipedia: A comparison with standard textbooks of pharmacology,” PLoS ONE 9, no.9 (2014): e106930, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0106930 (accessed 6 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
David G. Halsted, “Accuracy and quality in historical representation: Wikipedia, textbooks and the Investiture Controversy,” Digital Medievalist 9 (2013), DOI: 10.16995/dm.50 (accessed 6 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
N. J. Reavley et al., “Quality of information sources about mental disorders: A comparison of Wikipedia with centrally controlled web and printed sources,” Psychological Medicine 42, no.8 (2012): 1753–1762, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S003329171100287X (accessed 6 February 2023); Michael A. Scaffidi et al., “Comparison of the impact of Wikipedia, UpToDate, and a digital textbook on short-term knowledge acquisition among medical students: randomized controlled trial of three web-based resources,” JMIR medical education 3, no.2 (2017): e20, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/mededu.8188 (accessed 6 February 2023); Michael Yacob et al., “Wikipedia in vascular surgery medical education: Comparative study,” JMIR Medical Education 6, no.1 (2020): e18076, DOI: 10.2196/18076 (accessed 6 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Alexander A. Hernandez. “According to Wikipedia…: A Comparative Analysis of the Establishment and Display of Authority in a Social Problems Textbook and Wikipedia,” Master’s thesis (University of South Florida, 2009): https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/etd/2009/ (accessed 6 February 2023).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Behnam Rahdari et al., “Knowledge-driven Wikipedia article recommendation for electronic textbooks,” in Addressing Global Challenges and Quality Education, eds. Carlos Alario-Hoyos, María Jesús Rodríguez-Triana, Maren Scheffel, Inmaculada Arnedillo-Sánchez and Sebastian Maximilian Dennerlein (Cham: Springer): 363–368, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-57717-9_28 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bould et al., “References that anyone can edit”, g1585.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
“Statistics,” Wikipedia, last modified 23 September 2022, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Statistics (accessed 7 February 2023).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Wikipedia, “Notability.”
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Márton Mestyán, Taha Yasseri, and János Kertész, “Early prediction of movie box office success based on Wikipedia activity big data,” PLoS ONE 8, no.8 (2013): e71226, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0071226 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Taha Yasseri and Jonathan Bright, “Wikipedia traffic data and electoral prediction: Towards theoretically informed models,” EPJ Data Science 5, no.1 (2016): 22, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1140/epjds/s13688-016-0083-3 (accessed 7 February 2023); Hamza Salem and Fabian Stephany, “Wikipedia: a challenger’s best friend? Utilizing information-seeking behaviour patterns to predict US congressional elections,” Information, Communication & Society 26, no. 1 (2021): 174–200, DOI: 10.1080/1369118X.2021.1942953 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Helen Susannah Moat et al., “Quantifying Wikipedia usage patterns before stock market moves,” Scientific Reports 3, no.1 (2013): 1801, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/srep01801 (accessed 7 February 2023); Simon Behrendt, Franziska J. Peter, and David J. Zimmerman, “An encyclopedia for stock markets? Wikipedia searches and stock returns,” International Review of Financial Analysis 72 (2020): 101563, DOI: 10.1016/j.irfa.2020.101563 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Conor Donovan, Eóin T. Flaherty, and Eimear Quinn Healy, “Using big data from Wikipedia page views for official tourism statistics,” Statistical Journal of the IAOS 33, no.4 (2017): 997–1003, DOI: 10.3233/SJI-160320 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Abhishek Nagaraj, “Does copyright affect reuse? Evidence from Google Books and Wikipedia,” Management Science 64, no.7 (2017): 3091–3107, DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2017.2767 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Nicola Luigi Bragazzi et al., “Has the ice bucket challenge really increased people’s awareness of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis? Insights and ethical implications from Google Trends and Wikipedia: A 2 years-follow up,” Acta Medica Mediterranea 33, no.5 (2017): 875–878, DOI: 10.19193/0393-6384_2017_5_130 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
James M. Heilman and Andrew G. West, “Wikipedia and medicine: quantifying readership, editors, and the significance of natural language,” Journal of Medical Internet Research 17, no.3 (2015): e62, DOI: 10.2196/jmir.4069 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Michaël R. Laurent and Tim J. Vickers, “Seeking health information online: Does Wikipedia matter?,” Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 16, no.4 (2009): 471–479, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1197/jamia.M3059 (accessed 7 February 2023); Yla Tausczik et al., “Public anxiety and information seeking following the H1N1 outbreak: blogs, newspaper articles, and Wikipedia visits,” Health Communication 27, no. 2 (2017): 179–185, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2011.571759 (accessed 7 February 2023); Savino Sciascia and Massimo Radin, “What can Google and Wikipedia can tell us about a disease? Big Data trends analysis in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus,” International Journal of Medical Informatics 107 (2017): 65–69, DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.09.002 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
James M. Heilman and Andrew G. West, “Wikipedia and medicine: quantifying readership, editors, and the significance of natural language,” e62. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.4069
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Nicholas Generous et al., “Global disease monitoring and forecasting with Wikipedia,” PLoS Computational Biology 10, no.11 (2014): e1003892, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003892 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Generous et al., “Global disease monitoring and forecasting with Wikipedia,” e1003892; Reid Priedhorsky et al., “Measuring global disease with Wikipedia: Success, failure, and a research agenda,” CSCW Conf Comput Support Coop Work, 2017 Feb–Mar (2017): 1812–1834, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998183 (accessed 7 February 2023); Guillaume Rollin, José Lages, and Dima L. Shepelyansky, “World influence of infectious diseases from Wikipedia network analysis,” IEEE Access 7 (2019): 26073–26087, DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2899339 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Sandro Provenzano et al., “Predicting disease outbreaks: Evaluating measles infection with Wikipedia Trends,” Recenti Progressi in Medicina 110, no.6 (2019): 292–296, DOI: 10.1701/3182.31610 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
David J. McIver and John S. Brownstein, “Wikipedia usage estimates prevalence of influenza-like illness in the United States in near real-time,” PLoS Computational Biology 10, no.4 (2014): e1003581, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003581 (accessed 7 February 2023); Giovanni De Toni, Cristian Consonni, and Alberto Montresor, “A general method for estimating the prevalence of influenza-like-symptoms with Wikipedia data,” PLoS ONE 16, no.8 (2021): e0256858, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0256858 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Joshua Ritterman, Miles Osborne, and Ewan Klein, “Using prediction markets and Twitter to predict a swine flu pandemic,” Proceedings of the 1^st International Workshop of Mining Social Media (2009): 9–17, https://www.research.ed.ac.uk/en/publications/using-prediction-markets-and-twitter-to-predict-a-swine-flu-pande.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Daniel E. O’Leary and Veda C. Storey, “A Google–Wikipedia–Twitter model as a leading indicator of the numbers of coronavirus deaths,” Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management 27, no.3 (2020): 151–158, DOI: 10.1002/isaf.1482 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Julia Adams and Hannah Brückner, “Wikipedia, sociology, and the promise and pitfalls of Big Data,” Big Data & Society 2, no.2 (2015): 1–5, DOI: 10.1177/2053951715614332 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Julia Adams, Hannah Brückner, and Cambria Naslund, “Who counts as a notable sociologist on Wikipedia? Gender, race, and the ‘Professor Test’,” Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World 5 (2019), DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2378023118823946 (accessed 7 February 2023); Francesca Tripodi, “Ms. Categorized: gender, notability, and inequality on Wikipedia,” New Media & Society 0, no. 0: DOI: 10.1177/14614448211023772 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Uri Roll et al., “Using Wikipedia page views to explore the cultural importance of global reptiles,” Biological Conservation 204 (2016): 42–50, DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.03.037 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Jhonatan Guedes-Santos et al., “Evaluating public interest in protected areas using Wikipedia page views,” Journal for Nature Conservation 63 (2021): 126040, DOI: 10.1016/j.jnc.2021.126040 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Christoph Fink, Anna Hausmann, and Enrico Di Minin, “Online sentiment towards iconic species,” Biological Conservation 241 (2020): 108289, DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108289 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
John Brandt et el., “Identifying social media user demographics and topic diversity with computational social science: a case study of a major international policy forum,” Journal of Computational Social Science 3 (2020): 167–188, DOI: 10.1007/s42001-019-00061-9 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Philipp Poschmann and Jan Goldenstein, “Disambiguating and specifying social actors in big data: Using Wikipedia as a data source for demographic information,” Sociological Methods & Research 51, no.2 (2020): 887–925, DOI: 10.1177/0049124119882481 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
A.I. Michalski, G.M. Zharinov, and V.N. Anisimov, “Capacities and limitations of the use of data from Wikipedia for the analysis of human life expectancy,” Advances in Gerontology 11 (2021): 1–7, DOI: 10.1134/S2079057021010446 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Jason Priem, Heather A. Piwowar, and Bradley M. Hemminger, “Altmetrics in the wild: using social media to explore scholarly impact,” ArXiv (2012): DOI: http://arxiv.org/abs/1203.4745 (accessed 7 February 2023); Kayvan Kousha and Mike Thelwall, “Are Wikipedia citations important evidence of the impact of scholarly articles and books?,” Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 68, no.3 (2016): 762–779, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23694 (accessed 7 February 2023); Dariusz Jemielniak, Gwinyai Masukume, and Maciej Wilamowski, “The most influential medical journals according to Wikipedia: quantitative analysis,” Journal of Medical Internet Research 21, no.1 (2019): e11429. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/11429 (accessed 7 February 2023); Banasik-Jemielniak, Jemielniak and Wilamowski, “Psychology and Wikipedia: Measuring psychology journals’ impact by Wikipedia citations,” 756–774.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
L. Bornmann, R. Haunschild, and J. Adams, “Convergent validity of altmetrics and case studies for assessing societal impact: an analysis based on UK Research Excellence Framework (REF) data,” STI 2018 Conference Proceedings (2018): 41–48, DOI: https://hdl.handle.net/1887/65305 (accessed 7 February 2023); Lutz Bornmann, Robin Haunschild, and Jonathan Adams, “Do altmetrics assess societal impact in a comparable way to case studies? An empirical test of the convergent validity of altmetrics based on data from the UK research excellence framework (REF),” Journal of Informetrics 13, no.1 (2019): 325–340, DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2019.01.008 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
MaryKay Orgill, “Variation theory,” in Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning, ed. N.M. Seel (Boston: Springer, 2012), 3391–3393, https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_272 (accessed 7 February 2023). DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_272
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mona Holmqvist, Charlotte Tullgren, and Göran Brante, ”Defining an object of learning and the forms it appears in: the intended, enacted and lived object of learning in a learning situation,” (paper presented at the 4th International Multi-Conference on Society, Cybernetics and Informatics, Winter Garden, Orlando, Florida, 29 June – 2 July 2010), http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn%3Anbn%3Ase%3Ahkr%3Adiva-7142 (accessed 7 February 2023).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Larry Sanger, “The early history of Nupedia and Wikipedia: a memoir,” in Open sources 2.0: the continuing evolution, eds., Chris DiBona, Mark Stone, and Danese Cooper (Sebastapol, CA: O’Reilly Media), 307–338.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Defying easy categorization: Wikipedia as primary, secondary and tertiary resource

Abstract

Paradigm

My account