Research on Wikipedia Vandalism: a brief literature review <s> Method. <s> Context: Wikipedia has become one of the ten-most visited sites on the Web, and the world's leading source of Web reference information. Its rapid success has attracted over 1,000 scholarly studies that treat Wikipedia as a major topic or data source. Objectives: This article presents a protocol for conducting a systematic mapping (a broad-based literature review) of research on Wikipedia. It identifies what research has been conducted; what research questions have been asked, which have been answered; and what theories and methodologies have been employed to study Wikipedia. Methods: This protocol follows the rigorous methodology of evidence-based software engineering to conduct a systematic mapping study. Results and conclusions: This protocol reports a study in progress. <s> BIB001 </s> Research on Wikipedia Vandalism: a brief literature review <s> Method. <s> Wikipedia was formally launched in 2001, but the first research papers mentioning it appeared only in 2002. Since then it raised a huge amount of interest in the research community. At first mainly the content creation processes and the quality of the content were studied, but later on it was picked up as a valuable source for data mining and for testing. In this paper we present preliminary results that characterize the research done on and using Wikipedia since 2002. <s> BIB002
The method we used in this paper was a systematic review of the bibliography, which was applied to the literature about Wikipedia by Okoli and Schabram BIB001 BIB001 . The review that we have applied in this paper belongs to the category of stand-alone literature review, and its purpose is to systematically analyse the literature on the subject, without the use of primary data. The specific techniques we followed has been previously applied and validated by Bar-Ilan and Aharony BIB002 . We did three searches for bibliographical references in the Web of Science, Scopus and ACM DL databases, where we used the terms 'Wikipedia' and 'vandalism' in the title, key words and abstract fields. We did not search Google Scholar because it was not possible to limit the search terms to certain parts of the documents. The search carried out in Web of Science (titles and topics), on 1st February 2016, gave a result of 24 records. The search carried out in Scopus (title, key words and abstracts) on the same date, gave 92 results. The search also made on the same date in the ACM Digital Library (any field) gave 43 results. The established protocol for the selection of documents has been the possibility to determine that their contents relate to a study into or analysis of vandalism on Wikipedia. We processed the obtained results in order to eliminate duplications, correct errors, filter out those documents that were not relevant to our search, and complete the basic data of each reference that had not been collected previously. We reviewed the content of each text. After this processing, the number of references obtained that we considered valid for the analysis was 67. We reviewed each reference individually and we carried out qualitative data extraction and selection. We assigned an area of knowledge to each paper, depending on the affiliation of their authors and their contents. We used a controlled labelling system to describe the focus, objectives and the working method and we added the consolidated data to an RIS computer file for their processing using management software for bibliographical references, which for this paper was Mendeley, and to a CSV computer file, for their processing using data analysis applications. We released both files as Open Data so they could be used by other interested researchers. Finally, we published the references in specific groups on Zotero. Mendeley, CiteUlike y Bibsonomy ( 