Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract
Wikipedia is an online, free, multi-language, and collaborative encyclopedia, currently one of the most significant information sources on the web. The open nature of Wikipedia contributions raises concerns about the quality of its information. Previous studies have addressed this issue using manual evaluations and proposing generic measures for quality assessment. In this work, we focus on the quality of health-related content. For this purpose, we use general and health-specific features from Wikipedia articles to propose health-specific metrics. We evaluate these metrics using a set of Wikipedia articles previously assessed by WikiProject Medicine. We conclude that it is possible to combine generic and specific metrics to determine health-related content's information quality. These metrics are computed automatically and can be used by curators to identify quality issues. Along with the explored features, these metrics can also be used in approaches that automatically classify the quality of Wikipedia health-related articles.

Abstract
Archives are evolving. Analog archives are becoming increasingly digitized and linked with other cultural heritage institutions and information sources. Diverse forms of born-digital archives are appearing. This diversity asks for systematic ways to characterize existing archives managing physical or digital records. We conducted a systematic review to identify and understand how archives are characterized. From the 885 identified articles, only 15 were focused on archives’ characterization and, therefore, included in the study. We found several characterization features organized in three main groups: archival materials, provided services, and internal processes. © 2021, Springer Nature Switzerland AG.

Abstract
Wikipedia is a free, multilingual, and collaborative online encyclopedia. Nowadays, it is one of the largest sources of online knowledge, often appearing at the top of the results of the major search engines, being one of the most sought-after resources by the public searching for health information. The collaborative nature of Wikipedia raises security concerns since this information is used for decision-making, especially in the health area. Despite being available in hundreds of idioms, there are asymmetries between idioms, namely regarding their quality. In this work, we compare the quality of health information on Wikipedia between idioms with 100 million native speakers or more, and also in Greek, Italian, Korean, Turkish, Persian, Catalan and Hebrew, for historical tradition. Quality metrics are applied to health and medical articles in English, maintained by WikiProject Medicine, and their versions in the above idioms. With this, we contribute to a clarification of the role of Wikipedia in the access to health information. We demonstrate differences in both the quantity and quality of information available between idioms. English is the idiom with the highest quality in general. Urdu, Greek, Indonesian, and Hindi achieved lower values of quality.