Wikipedia is one of the most popular sites on the Web, with millions of users relying on it to satisfy a broad range of information needs every day. Although it is crucial to understand what exactly these needs are in order to be able to meet them, little is currently known about why users visit Wikipedia. The goal of this paper is to fill this gap by combining a survey of Wikipedia readers with a log-based analysis of user activity. Based on an initial series of user surveys, we build a taxonomy of Wikipedia use cases along several dimensions, capturing users' motivations to visit Wikipedia, the depth of knowledge they are seeking, and their knowledge of the topic of interest prior to visiting Wikipedia. Then, we quantify the prevalence of these use cases via a large-scale user survey conducted on live Wikipedia with almost 30,000 responses. Our analyses highlight the variety of factors driving users to Wikipedia, such as current events, media coverage of a topic, personal curiosity, work or school assignments, or boredom. Finally, we match survey responses to the respondents' digital traces in Wikipedia's server logs, enabling the discovery of behavioral patterns associated with specific use cases. For instance, we observe long and fast-paced page sequences across topics for users who are bored or exploring randomly, whereas those using Wikipedia for work or school spend more time on individual articles focused on topics such as science. Our findings advance our understanding of reader motivations and behavior on Wikipedia and can have implications for developers aiming to improve Wikipedia's user experience, editors striving to cater to their readers' needs, third-party services (such as search engines) providing access to Wikipedia content, and researchers aiming to build tools such as recommendation engines.

The damage personal attacks cause to online discourse motivates many platforms to try to curb the phenomenon. However, understanding the prevalence and impact of personal attacks in online platforms at scale remains surprisingly difficult. The contribution of this paper is to develop and illustrate a method that combines crowdsourcing and machine learning to analyze personal attacks at scale. We show an evaluation method for a classifier in terms of the aggregated number of crowd-workers it can approximate. We apply our methodology to English Wikipedia, generating a corpus of over 100k high quality human-labeled comments and 63M machine-labeled ones from a classifier that is as good as the aggregate of 3 crowd-workers, as measured by the area under the ROC curve and Spearman correlation. Using this corpus of machine-labeled scores, our methodology allows us to explore some of the open questions about the nature of online personal attacks. This reveals that the majority of personal attacks on Wikipedia are not the result of a few malicious users, nor primarily the consequence of allowing anonymous contributions from unregistered users.

Earmarks are legislative provisions that direct federal funds to specific projects, circumventing the competitive grant-making process of federal agencies. Identifying and cataloging earmarks is a tedious, time-consuming process carried out by experts from public interest groups. In this paper, we present a machine learning system for automatically extracting earmarks from congressional bills and reports. We first describe a table-parsing algorithm for extracting budget allocations from appropriations tables in congressional bills. We then use machine learning classifiers to identify budget allocations as earmarked objects with an out of sample ROC AUC score of 0.89. Using this system, we construct the first publicly available database of earmarks dating back to 1995. Our machine learning approach adds transparency, accuracy, and speed to the congressional appropriations process.

The different Wikipedia language editions vary dramatically in how comprehensive they are. As a result, most language editions contain only a small fraction of the sum of information that exists across all Wikipedias. In this paper, we present an approach to filling gaps in article coverage across different Wikipedia editions. Our main contribution is an end-to-end system for recommending articles for creation that exist in one language but are missing in another. The system involves identifying missing articles, ranking the missing articles according to their importance, and recommending important missing articles to editors based on their interests. We empirically validate our models in a controlled experiment involving 12,000 French Wikipedia editors. We find that personalizing recommendations increases editor engagement by a factor of two. Moreover, recommending articles increases their chance of being created by a factor of 3.2. Finally, articles created as a result of our recommendations are of comparable quality to organically created articles. Overall, our system leads to more engaged editors and faster growth of Wikipedia with no effect on its quality.