Message du troisi{è}me type : irruption d'un tiers dans un dialogue en ligne

Our study focuses on Wikipedia talk pages, from a global perspective analyzing contributors' behaviors in online interactions. Using a corpus comprising all Wikipedia talk pages in French, totaling more than 300,000 discussion threads, we examine how discussions with more than two participants (multiparty conversation) unfold and we specifically investigate the role of a third participant's intervention when two Wikipedians have already initiated an exchange. In this regard, we concentrate on the sequential structure of these interactions in terms of articulation among different participants and aim to specify this third message by exploring its lexical particularities, while also proposing an initial typology of the third participant's message role and how it aligns with preceding messages.

Managing conflicts between users in Wikipedia

Wikipedia is nowadays a widely used encyclopedia, and one of the most visible sites on the Internet. Its strong principle of collaborative work and free editing sometimes generates disputes due to disagreements between users. In this article we study how the wikipedian community resolves the conflicts and which roles do wikipedian choose in this process. We observed the users behavior both in the article talk pages, and in the Arbitration Committee pages specifically dedicated to serious disputes. We first set up a users typology according to their involvement in conflicts and their publishing and management activity in the encyclopedia. We then used those user types to describe users behavior in contributing to articles that are tagged by the wikipedian community as being in conflict with the official guidelines of Wikipedia, or conversely as being well featured.

La fiabilité des informations sur le web

Online IR tools have to take into account new phenomena linked to the appearance of blogs, wiki and other collaborative publications. Among these collaborative sites, Wikipedia represents a crucial source of information. However, the quality of this information has been recently questionned. A better knowledge of the contributors' behaviors should help users navigate through information whose quality may vary from one source to another. In order to explore this idea, we present an analysis of the role of different types of contributors in the control of the publication of conflictual articles.