REVIEW 1 cited by
The Lives of Bots
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Automated software agents --- or bots --- have long been an important part of how Wikipedia's volunteer community of editors write, edit, update, monitor, and moderate content. In this paper, I discuss the complex social and technical environment in which Wikipedia's bots operate. This paper focuses on the establishment and role of English Wikipedia's bot policies and the Bot Approvals Group, a volunteer committee that reviews applications for new bots and helps resolve conflicts between Wikipedians about automation. In particular, I examine an early bot controversy over the first bot in Wikipedia to automatically enforce a social norm about how Wikipedian editors ought to interact in discussion spaces. As I show, bots enforce many rules in Wikipedia, but humans produce these bots and negotiate rules around their operation. Because of the openness of Wikipedia's processes around automation, we can vividly observe the often-invisible human work involved in such algorithmic systems --- in stark contrast to most other user-generated content platforms.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
LLMs in Wikipedia: Investigating How LLMs Impact Participation in Knowledge Communities
Wikipedia editors who used LLMs reported that experienced editors expanded their contributions, while newcomers were pushed into editorial judgment they lacked skills for and saw their LLM-assisted edits rejected.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.