It isone of top-notch, this absolutely ain’t cheapest name on our list today. At a fraction of high fashion price, because histles will turn around designer inspired looks within weeks of a trend emerging. It helps to know your faves, store stocks a few in house brands. Their layering pieces, ’tissue thin’ tees, and winter coats are a lot of best you can buy, as every Canadian knows. Remember, step this way for beautifully designed clothes thatactually last. In most major cities you can find a HM on just about every corner but even still, we prefer less stressful experience of browsing online.It’s easier to see everything they carry, none of it’s been tried on 20 times, and there’s no risk of being jostled by a number of rowdy teens. Authors affiliated with institutions in to appear to cite Wikipedia more often in their scholarly publications than authors in any other country, as illustrated below.
Nanyang Technological University, Carnegie Mellon University, Indiana University, and Tsinghua University were also listed among 15 institutions which are most productive in Wikipedia research as well.
Researchers affiliated with Carnegie Mellon University, Georgia Institute of Technology, and Indiana University were most active in citing Wikipedia.
Most highly citing affiliated institutions are rank ordered in Table International researchers affiliated with universities in Asian countries Nanyang Technological University, University of Hong Kong, Tsinghua University, and Chinese University of Hong Kong cited Wikipedia most frequently. There were a tal of 1746 publications included in WoS and Scopus for years 2002 to 2010. The general number of research publications about Wikipedia and citations to Wikipedia has increased steadily, since Wikipedia was launched in 2001.
Reviews in library and information science literature indicated that Wikipedia itself has increasingly become a subject of research from diverse academic disciplines due to its exceptional scale and utility.
While incorporating collaboration, evolving debates, and process as assurance, was studied using Wikipedia as an example, concept of information quality.
Wikipedia entry. Academic studies of Wikipedia reports a partial list of academic writings about Wikipedia reported in journal articles, and conference proceedings among other formats and Academic studies about Wikipedia page includes some Wikipedia research in peer reviewed publications. Interestingly, in WoS 10 most frequently citing publications contain about 12 tototal percent citations to Wikipedia while 11 publications most active in producing Wikipedia research comprise about 20 percent of publications about it. Publications in WoS and Scopus which most cite Wikipedia were identified and are rank ordered in Table Among 22 publications that produced most research about Wikipedia, four namely Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Proceedings of International Symposium on Wikis, Monday and Journal of American Society for Information Science and Technology also cited Wikipedia most frequently.
Likewise, in Scopus 10 most highly citing publications contain only 12 relevant percent citations whereas totop 11 publications on Wikipedia research contain about 37 percent of pertinent publications.
Thus, Wikipedia’s impact on scholarly communications appears to be stronger through citations to it rather than through publications about it.
Wikipedia research is highly concentrated in a relatively few publications whereas citations to Wikipedia are scattered among a larger number of diverse publications in both WoS and Scopus. They nevertheless are indicative of Wikipedia’s impact on scholarly communication, book reviews. Letters, and news items are not strictly speaking research. Notice, reported numbers regarding writing about and citing of Wikipedia going to be taken carefully as they reflect only a snapshot provided by a few databases. Publications included in these databases are mostly in English, since this research is based only on WoS and Scopus.
a number of researchers on Wikipedia were affiliated with universities.
These 15 affiliated institutions contributed 230 publications which were about 13 tototal percent publications in WoS and Scopus.
Most productive 15 institutions are listed below in ranked order, in Table Individual researchers affiliated with University of Amsterdam, Nanyang Technological University and MaxPlanckInstitut für Informatik were most productive in doing research on Wikipedia. Researchers affiliated with Carnegie Mellon University and Indiana University were most active in research on Wikipedia in United States. Largest proportion of research on Wikipedia had been contributed by scholars in academic institutions in to, followed by scholars from Germany, United Kingdom, and China. Analysis by discipline shows that most frequent contributors to Wikipedia research are computer scientists, information scientists, and mathematicians. University of Amsterdam in Netherlands and MaxPlanckInstitut für Informatik in Germany were most active in producing research on Wikipedia. Anyways, researchers in universities are major contributors to Wikipedia research. Actually, conference publications and journal articles are major venues for reporting research on Wikipedia. Research about Wikipedia is published most frequently by individual researchers who are affiliated with academic institutions in Europe and Asian countries Netherlands, Germany, Australia and Japan.
Accordingly the Lecture Notes in Computer Science and Proceedings of International Symposium on Wikis have published more Wikipedia research than any other publications.
Ylva Gavel and Lars Iselid, Web of Science and Scopus.
Journal title overlap study, Online Information Review, volume 32, number 1. Known jim Giles, Internet encyclopaedias go head to head, Nature, volume 438, number 7070. Therefore, august 2010. Although, a search in WoS using Wikipedia in totopic OR title field was conducted in January 2011 to find the tal amount of records for which a publication’s pic is Wikipedia. Essentially, in identical way a search in Scopus in totitle, abstract, or keyword fields was conduced. Now look, the presence of Wikipedia in scholarly publications was assumed if a study’s major pics include Wikipedia, or Wikipedia is used in their references. Two data types were collected to examine visibility of Wikipedia in scholarly publications. Consequently, this research was limited to Scopus alone as it includes only peerreviewed publications. Scopus allows a search conducted beyond its own databases by providing Web searching options. There were 291 records in WoS and 1455 in Scopus with pics including Wikipedia. Now regarding aforementioned fact… Now look, a truncated search was used to match any variations and to achieve a more comprehensive search result.
So a search for cited work = Wikipedia was conducted in WoS, intention to examine facts of Wikipedia’s impact.
There were 340 records citing Wikipedia in WoS.
Science Citation Index Expanded, Social Science Citation Index, Arts and Humanities Citation Index, Conference Proceedings Citation IndexScience, and Conference Proceedings Citation IndexSocial Sciences and Humanities. Times Cited count on results page are counted from all databases in WoS. In a Cited Reference Search, all references in WoS databases that cite Wikipedia were retrieved. One should note that the overall amount of citing articles on Cited Reference Search page and number listed in Times Cited count on results page after finishing search might differ determined by scope of one’s institution’s subscriptions to various databases within WoS. Normally, result should probably be smaller, if an institution has access to a limited time period like from 2005 to topresent. I am sure that the result might be influenced by one’s subscription periods. Remember, all entries which cite Wikipedia are selected, search is finished, whenever search is executed. Besides, search result listed cited author, cited work, year, and the overall amount of times cited for a specific article. If an institution has a subscription to Science Citation Index Expanded and Social Science Citation Index, Arts and Humanities Citation Index but not Conference Proceedings Citation Index, the general number of citing articles on Cited Reference Search page should be smaller.
Table 4 describes 10 academic fields which are most active in Wikipedia research in accordance with WoS and Scopus.
Note that a publication should be categorized in more than one subject category and thus tototal number of publications may include duplication.
Scopus categorizes its content into 27 subject areas and WoS includes 251 subject areas. Certainly, computer science was most productive. In Scopus an exceeding small portion of publications, about one Wikipedia percent research output, derives from arts and humanities. I know that the fields of mathematics, social sciences, and engineering are also highly productive. Nonetheless, about 42 Wikipedia percent research is produced from many areas in computer science fields and about 26 percent from information and library science in WoS databases while in Scopus about 72 percent of research originates from computer science category as defined by Scopus.
Academic fields in this study were defined by these databases respectively. Now let me ask you something. Lutz Bornmann and ‘HansDieter’ Daniel, What do citation counts measure? So a review of studies on citing behavior, Journal of Documentation, volume 64, number pp. Noam Cohen, New rules in wiki world, NYC Times, at query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9501E5DC1430F936A1575BC0A96F9C8B63, accessed 20 August 2010.
Felix Stalder and Jesse Hirsh, Open source intelligence, Monday, volume 7, number 6, at firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/961/882, accessed 21 July 2011.
Situating Rob Kling, Information Society, volume 23, number 4.
Blaise Cronin and Debora Shaw, Peers and spheres of influence. Comparison between Wikipedia and two other Web based philosophy resources, Monday, volume 13, number 2, at accessed 30 August 2010. Basically, beate Elvebakk, Philosophy democratized? This is tocase. All search results were downloaded into a MS Excel file for data analysis. Consequently, there were 3339 records citing Wikipedia as source titles in references in Scopus. In a similar way, a search for refsrctitle = wikipedia was conducted in Scopus for publications with source title in references. For example, larry Dossey and Brendan Luyt cited Wikipedia most often in their scholarly publications as noted in WoS. Use of Wikipedia is on torise. Lim’s, became a teaching resource in influence of Wikipedia on scholarly community as indicated by citations was identified in course of this research. With that said, this paper sheds some light on trends regarding Wikipedia’s place in formal scholarship and demonstrates its growing visibility. With that said, this research adds to our understanding of Wikipedia’s role in scholarship and reflects scholarly regard in some sense for a highly controversial yet well used resource on toInternet.
Among approximately three million articles in English Wikipedia, So there’re about 3194 featured articles.
Spoerri are leading outlets for Wikipedia research.
I know that the International Symposium on Wikis’ Web site reports that it focuses on research and practice about wikis and open collaboration. Besides, a featured article has a small bronze star icon on totop right corner of toarticle’s page. Generally, And so it’s interesting that Wikipedia research appears to be concentrated in a small number of publications as recorded in Scopus while scattered among a larger number in WoS. Now, a WorldCat search retrieves more than 100000 items, Lecture Notes in Computer Science is a major series. Of course, thus it appears to be a very appropriate venue for Wikipedia research.p 11 publications produced about 20 Wikipedia percent research in WoS compared to about 37 percent in Scopus. Oftentimes And so it’s noteworthy that Journal of American Society for Information Science and Technology appears on both lists. Now please pay attention. Wikipedia research is most often reported in journals in WoS and conference proceedings in Scopus, since of coverage differences between oS and Scopus.
As pointed out by Wikipedia’s featured list criteria, featured articles represent better articles which, have undergone a thorough review process by Wikipedia’s editors to meet highest standards for usefulness, completeness, accuracy, neutrality and style.
Citing a study conducted by researchers at Carnegie Mellon University and Palo Alto Research Center, toWikipedia’s site lists most frequently covered pics Culture and toarts, Biographies and persons, Geography and places, Society and social sciences, History and events, among others.
Monday is also highly regarded in publishing Wikipedia research. Whenever utilizing cited work found in and Scopus, impact and influence of Wikipedia were identified. Now regarding aforementioned fact… I am sure that the growth of publications on Wikipedia research, most active researchers, their associated institutions, academic fields and their geographic distribution are treated in this paper. Just think for a moment. Additionally, leading authors, affiliated institutions, countries, academic fields, and publications that frequently cite Wikipedia are identified. Publications in Institute of Scientific Information’s Web of Science and Elsevier’s Scopus databases were utilized to collect data about Wikipedia research and citations to Wikipedia. As a result, Wikipedia tends to be more highly cited in journal articles as shown in Table 30 percent in Scopus and 70 percent in WoS.
Only seven citations percent in WoS were to conference papers, contrasted to 31 percent in Scopus.
In summary, visibility of Wikipedia research is more prominent in conference and proceedings papers while citations to Wikipedia are more prevalent in journal articles.
While proceeding papers, and editorial materials, while in WoS it had been published more frequently in articles, table 12 shows that in Scopus research about Wikipedia was published predominantly in conference papers. Thus review papers among other formats. Tables 12 and 13 present data about kinds of publications types that, respectively, write about and cite Wikipedia. American scholars account for about 37 published percent research on Wikipedia in WoS and 22 percent in Scopus whereas they produce 43 percent of citations to Wikipedia in WoS and 27 percent in Scopus. For citation counts, ISI databases, Scopus and Google Scholar are most often used tools. Known a special report by prestigious weekly journal Nature. With that said, articles in group with a high presence of main editors tended to become featured articles more easily.
Cronin and Shaw.
American scholars are strong in both Wikipedia research and citing Wikipedia in their publications.
Basically the study reported that not almost any contribution had identical weight and major edits were not necessarily contributing to article quality. Role of main editors differed in two article groups. ISI’s three citation databases were one comprehensive citation data source until Elsevier’s Scopus and Google Scholar were launched in In a paper comparing citation counts provide by WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar for articles from Journal of American Society for Information Science and Technology, Bauer and Bakkalbasi. Considering above said. Besides, a closer look reveals that scholars most probably will cite Wikipedia than to actually produce research on Wikipedia itself. That’s interesting. Nielsen and Gerhard Weikum of to’Max Planck Institut’ für Informatik brought an additional 42 citations by researchers affiliated with institutions in Hong Kong in Scopus which were added into China. Yes, that’s right! Scholars in to, Germany, United Kingdom, China, and France were most active in generating research on Wikipedia while researchers affiliated in to, United Kingdom, Germany, and China cited Wikipedia most often. Also, citation counts in scholarly publications been frequently used as an important ol to assess relative scholarly impact of research, diffusion of new research ideas, to study journals, individual researchers, and to identify maps of scholarly communication across scientific specialties and so on.
Other sides of quality like Wikipedia’s biased coverage and lack of cited sources were identified as Wikipedia risks.
This study is only a small step in demonstrating visibility of Wikipedia in scholarly communication.
Identifying major pics covered in scholarly publications about Wikipedia can be addressed in future research. Other problems such as examining gender differences, coauthor networks in Wikipedia research, and motivations for citing Wikipedia could add further details on utility of Wikipedia in scholarship. Now look, a recent study on journal title overlap between WoS and Scopus databases reported that about 45 titles percent in Scopus are not covered in WoS, while 16 titles percent in WoS are not covered in Scopus. Although, should’ve been noted. Fact, scope and kinds of publications types included in WoS and Scopus differ and this will be taken into account in understanding search results and interpretations.
Undoubtedly it’s clear that WoS covers journals more selectively while Scopus covers a much higher numbers of conference papers.
Scopus states that it contains 18000 titles from more than 5000 international publishers, including 16500 peerreviewed journals in addition to about 1200 open access journals, 600 trade publications, 2350 book series, and 6 million conference papers among others.
While international proceedings coverage for arts and humanities. So purpose of this study is to explore extent of Wikipedia’s presence in scholarly publications in Web of Science and Elsevier’s Scopus databases. Also, woS covers Science Citation Index Expanded indexing Besides, the fields of engineering, and medicine are quite active in citing Wikipedia in their publications. Anyways, in Scopus, about 42 citations percent come from computer science, 24 percent from engineering, and another 21 percent from social sciences. Besides, the computer science field displays both highest proportion of Wikipedia research and citations to Wikipedia. For instance, in arts and humanities proportion of citations to Wikipedia is also greater than proportion of research publications about Wikipedia. Table 10 displays 12 academic fields which cite Wikipedia most often as noted in WoS and Scopus. That a publication can be assigned to more than one subject category so citation counts by fields may include duplicates. Actually the proportions are nearly equal for social scientists who produce 18 Wikipedia percent research and 21 percent of tocitations. In a similar manner, an additional country search for Hong Kong in Scopus added 18 more publications to China.
Four publications from Scotland were added to United Kingdom’s total.
Most productive countries were to and United Kingdom in WoS and to and Germany in Scopus.
Country name, United Kingdom, was used consistently in Scopus for all publications affiliated with that nation. China’s production included three additional publications from Hong Kong in WoS. While accounting for about 22 publications percent in Scopus and about 37 percent in WoS, to is far stronger in producing research on Wikipedia than any other country. Although, next most productive countries were China, France, United Kingdom, Japan, Italy and Netherlands in Scopus. Likewise, for United Kingdom, additional searches were conducted in WoS for England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. To table 1 lists most productive countries in Wikipedia research. Of course one publication about Wikipedia research in Scopus was coauthored by 37 individuals.
Analysis of author productivity, on the basis of the amount of publications included in WoS and Scopus, indicated that a small numbers of authors created loads of publications.
There were 291 publications with a tal of 701 authors in WoS and 1455 publications in Scopus with a tal of 3940 principal and collaborative authors with a research pic including Wikipedia.
Multiple authorship was tonorm. Noone denies that Wikipedia is now a highly used, albeit controversial, information source. Now pay attention please. Wikipedia has become increasingly an important ol for fact checking, Wikipedia had been a pic of more than 50 theses and dissertations worldwide and had been a subject of more than 200 monographic publications. Coverage of philosophers in twentieth century listed in Wikipedia and in two other widely used online resources was compared for data regarding their birth date, gender, national and disciplinary backgrounds.
With that said, this study found that Wikipedia contained more entries for living and ‘minor’ philosophers than traditional resources. It’s an interesting fact that the semantic coverage of English Wikipedia was studied and represented in regards to baseline statistics for articles, subject categories, and totop 10 authors. Active research on Wikipedia and citations to Wikipedia testifies to Wikipedia position as a rich resource, as demonstrated in this study. Actually, increasing scholarly attention to Wikipedia suggests a growing acceptance of its credibility as a valid information resource. Now pay attention please. Wikipedia’s plans to include more women and elderly as well as expanding international offices will bring balance and wholeness in content. Recent involvement by higher education communities in Wikipedia implies Wikipedia’s potential to become not only a reliable resource but also a learning and teaching ol for students. Scholarly research about Wikipedia apparently first appeared in 3 June 2002 Monday issue, in paper entitled Open source intelligence by Felix Stalder and Jesse Hirsh as well as in a 2002 article in Online entitled Péter’s picks and pans review on Wikipedia by Péter Jacsó.
Whenever corresponding to its increased use as an information resource, table 11 summaries pertinent data about Wikipedia in WoS and Scopus from 2002 to As Table 11 illustrates, research about and citations to Wikipedia in scholarly publications have steadily increased over time since its launch in Although citations to Wikipedia in WoS peaked in 2007, lots of us know that there is substantial evidence in citation patterns to demonstrate significant impact of Wikipedia on scholarly communication over past decade.
An advanced search combined with subjarea shows the general number of documents categorized as computer science.
These analysis ols allow search results to be sorted by ranked order for a selected field. From search in WoS, all search results were selected to display list of publications with a main pic on Wikipedia and to refine result using ISI analysis tools. Certainly, an affilorg brings additional research output by researchers affiliated with institutions in Hong Kong. Therefore, a search combined with field affilcountry displays publication output by researchers affiliated with institutions located in United States. Brendan Luyt and Oded Nov have published most frequently on Wikipedia in scholarly publications covered by WoS. Therefore the search result displays typical citation information including author, title, source title, its volume and number designation, pagination, and publication year.