INRIA Bordeaux - VizWhiz
VAST 2008 Challenge
Mini Challenge 1: Wiki Editors

Authors and Affiliations:

Umang Sharan, INRIA Bordeaux, umangsh@gmail.com [PRIMARY Contact]

Guy Melancon, INRIA Bordeaux, Guy.Melancon@labri.fr [FACULTY Advisor]

Student team: YES

Tool(s):

Tulip (http://www.tulip-software.org): A visualization system created by David Auber to draw and display huge graphs, allowing the navigation through geometric operations as well as the extraction of subgraphs and the enhancement of the results obtained by filtering.

GraphViz (http://graphviz.org): GraphViz is an open source visualization tool which has several main graph layout programs.

Two Page Summary: YES

Summary file

ANSWERS:

---

Wiki-1: What are the factions represented in the edit pages and who are its members? In other words, describe the groups and their members based on their editing changes.  

Group	Names
Ardent Supporters for Paraiso movement	VictoriaV, RyogaNica
Ardent Opposers of Paraiso movement	Agustin, Rm99
Moderators (Neutral editors)	Edemir, Sierra, Adriano, Socorro, Honoria, Gustava, DailosTamanca, Ricarda, Paintman, Salvatora, Kurrop, Metsoma
Bots	BakBOT, SilviaBot, ChkBOT
Positive moderators (wikipedia editors inclined towards supporting the movement)	Amado, Sara, Savanna
General Spammers	Oscar, Alverio, Alberto, Generosa, Cavaliz, Aibdescalzo, Guillebelloc, Alleborgo, KesheR, Idoia, Daro520, Ria, Hectoryalejandro, Metamario, MoisesCorral, DavidMoran, Hinzel
Drastic Spammers	Absalon, Alphanzo, Alejo, Cristofer, AlejandroSanchez, Gregoria, McGonagal, Molotover

Detailed Answer:

We began our investigation by parsing the wikipedia edit logs and importing the generated disagreement graph into GraphViz and Tulip. The nodes in the graph correspond to the list of wikipedia editors while the edges correspond to the number of times the two editors disagreed over a point of view in the edit logs. We considered editors with valid usernames rather than just IP addresses as most of the IP addresses recorded just 1 edit, thereby we believe that such anonymous edits were mostly aimed at spam. The disagreement graph is shown below:

We expected the graph to be largely bipartite comprising of people for and against the movement. However, we found several factions in the edits logs. First we filtered out bots and moderators from the data. Bots and moderators mostly formed a cluster centered around themselves as shown in the first two figures below:

We differentiated between the two factions of bots and moderators using the types of changes each of them were responsible for. Typical edits from Edemir (a moderator) were like:

# (cur) (last) 14:30, 20 December 2006 Edemir (Talk | contribs) (102,188 bytes) (Undid revision xxxxxxxxx by Sevilla (talk) - Counselor doesn't need quotes here.)
# (cur) (last) 22:22, 17 December 2006 Sevilla (Talk | contribs) (102,089 bytes)
# (cur) (last) 14:55, 11 December 2006 Edemir (Talk | contribs) m (115,847 bytes) (Reverted 1 edit by 24.195.147.x identified as vandalism to last revision by Diegoob. using TW)
# (cur) (last) 14:36, 11 December 2006 24.195.147.x (Talk) (115,601 bytes) (?Beliefs)

Typical edits from BakBOT (a bot) were against more drastic spammers (like page replacement):

# (cur) (last) 01:38, 12 December 2006 BakBOT (Talk | contribs) (115,847 bytes) (Reverting possible vandalism by Special:Contributions/84.158.202.x to version by Remedios. False positive? report it. Thanks, User:BakBOT. (116023) (Bot))
# (cur) (last) 01:37, 12 December 2006 84.158.202.x (Talk) (41 bytes) (?Replaced page with ''''Paraiso''' is complete bull shit.')
# (cur) (last) 23:06, 16 November 2006 BakBOT (Talk | contribs) (108,334 bytes) (Reverting possible vandalism by Special:Contributions/Molotover to version by Clodoveo. If this is a mistake, report it. Thanks, BakBOT. (74757) (Bot))
# (cur) (last) 23:06, 16 November 2006 Molotover (Talk | contribs) (50 bytes) (?Replaced page with 'WARNING, YOU'VE BEEN BRAINWASHED, LEAVE THIS PAGE!')

We determined that VictoriaV and RyogaNica are supporters of the movement who post frequently and Rm99 and Augustin are active opposers (more than single edits) of the movement from the wiki edits and the wiki discussion page. The mini bipartite graph amongst these 4 nodes in the disagreement graph (the third figure above) and the ‘Civility’ section in the wiki discussion page support our claim.

# (cur) (last) 19:40, 31 August 2006 Agustin (Talk | contribs) m (91,891 bytes) (Undid revision xxxxxxxxx by VictoriaV (talk) I challenge this reference. "Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed")
# (cur) (last) 19:15, 31 August 2006 VictoriaV (Talk | contribs) (92,109 bytes) (Undid revision xxxxxxxxx by Agustin If you don't understand something, ask, but don't delete references.)
# (cur) (last) 19:05, 31 August 2006 Agustin (Talk | contribs) (91,891 bytes) (?Paraiso as a state-recognized religion - Removed problem ref, see Talk:Paraiso as a state-recognized religion)

Further, we established there are two types of spammers-general spammers like Sevilla and drastic spammers like Molotover (refer to the wiki edits for bots vs moderators above). The former spam the page with minor edits, POV, page defacing which are rectified by the moderators. The latter are responsible for more drastic changes to the webpage – like page replacement – and are generally tackled by bots. The following figure shows the disagreement graph loaded in Tulip for better visualization and navigation.

---

Wiki-2:  Is the Paraiso movement involved in violent activities? 

NO

List of wiki edits providing evidence

 
# (cur) (last) 11:58, 18 November 2006 Amado (Talk | contribs) (114,196 bytes) (Deleted false statement. A person can only be declared after it has been proven in a Justicia Juicio that he committed a high crime. Intro to C. Ethics 1998 is no longer used refer to 2006 edition only)
# (cur) (last) 22:42, 21 November 2006 Amado (Talk | contribs) (115,165 bytes) (?Paraiso Justice - This whole section is false, there is no such info in Paraiso Ethics Book, I did look! I was going to edit but this Justice is of too little importance to be here.)
# (cur) (last) 09:52, 4 September 2006 Barfly2001 (Talk | contribs) (93,491 bytes) (?See also - {{wikinews|Belgian justice prosecutes Paraiso}})
# (cur) (last) 09:26, 4 September 2006 Angelgasperi (Talk | contribs) (93,439 bytes) (?Controversy and criticism - Belgium prosecuting, wikinews source)
# (cur) (last) 21:59, 7 December 2006 Criston (Talk | contribs) (116,617 bytes) (?Controversy and criticism - banned in Mexico)
# (cur) (last) 01:08, 6 November 2006 Saturnina (Talk | contribs) (105,394 bytes) (?Controversy and criticism - Spain removed)
# (cur) (last) 07:56, 5 November 2006 Amado (Talk | contribs) (105,194 bytes) (/* Paraiso gains religious recognition in Spain)
# (cur) (last) 16:38, 5 September 2006 Ricarda (Talk | contribs) (93,892 bytes) (?Controversy and criticism - Added back "Canada" removed by User:VictoriaV)
# (cur) (last) 09:28, 5 September 2006 Roldana (Talk | contribs) (93,541 bytes) (?Controversy and criticism - Add Canada plus reference)

Short Answer:

It is unlikely that the Paraiso movement is involved in violent activities based on the wiki logs. We have several log statements saying that the movement has been banned and prosecuted in several countries – banned in Mexico but accepted in Spain – but that could be because of the extreme ideas of the movement and perhaps cultural conflict. The movement may have eccentric ideas and may not be approved by everyone, but there is not sufficient proof in the logs that it is involved in violent activities. The few claims of bad behavior against Paraiso movement are countered by references of legal proceedings. There is no evidence in the logs about any convictions of any Paraiso movement supporter in violent activities.