维基百科条目在搜索引擎中的排名：合理质量的公平排名？
Ranking of Wikipedia articles in search engines revisited: Fair ranking for reasonable quality?
摘要：
本文的目的是审查激烈讨论的问题，是否排名维基百科的文章在搜索引擎是合理的文章的质量。在概述了当前维基百科信息质量的研究之后，总结了关于维基百科条目质量的扩展讨论。在此基础上，提出了一种评价维基百科条目的探试法，并将其应用于在搜索引擎检索有效性测试中得分较高的维基百科条目，并与陪审员的相关性判断进行比较。在所有测试的搜索引擎中，陪审员一致认为维基百科的结果比相应结果位置上的其他结果更好。相关性判断通常与启发式评价的结果大致一致。高相关性判断不符合启发式评估的相对低分数的情况被解释为维基百科高度信任的指标。维基百科的系统性缺陷之一在于其不连贯的用户模型。进一步调整建议的标准目录，例如对所提供的标准进行不同的加权，可以作为维基百科条目的用户模型差异化评估的起点。本文将参考文献质量评价方法应用于维基百科条目，并与搜索引擎评价问题相结合。
英文摘要：
This paper aims to review the fiercely discussed question of whether the ranking of Wikipedia articles in search engines is justified by the quality of the articles. After an overview of current research on information quality in Wikipedia, a summary of the extended discussion on the quality of encyclopedic entries in general is given. On this basis, a heuristic method for evaluating Wikipedia entries is developed and applied to Wikipedia articles that scored highly in a search engine retrieval effectiveness test and compared with the relevance judgment of jurors. In all search engines tested, Wikipedia results are unanimously judged better by the jurors than other results on the corresponding results position. Relevance judgments often roughly correspond with the results from the heuristic evaluation. Cases in which high relevance judgments are not in accordance with the comparatively low score from the heuristic evaluation are interpreted as an indicator of a high degree of trust in Wikipedia. One of the systemic shortcomings of Wikipedia lies in its necessarily incoherent user model. A further tuning of the suggested criteria catalogue, for instance the different weighing of the supplied criteria, could serve as a starting point for a user model differentiated evaluation of Wikipedia articles. Approved methods of quality evaluation of reference works are applied to Wikipedia articles and integrated with the question of search engine evaluation.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
