Talk:Reputation system

Miranda Wayne

This article lacks a good head section. I think that collecting information to have a good head section is the first thing we need to do to get this article in good standing. Additionally I think that there needs to be a more in depth discussion on the different types of reputation systems. I'll begin working on these items

Some additional problems: 1. It needs explanations or reference for the classification basis of the type. I agree to enhance the types part in the article. 2. In the online type of the reputation system, it includes too many states from Howard Rheingold. It seems that he is not the expert or famous researcher in the field of the reputation system. 3. So many references are not cited in the articles. We may check these references, cite the useful ones and remove the useless ones.

Runhua (talk) 23:01, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Those are all valid points, Runhua. I will begin working the head section with the following sources: http://rt4rf9qn2y.scholar.serialssolutions.com/?sid=google&auinit=P&aulast=Resnick&atitle=Reputation+systems&id=doi:10.1145/355112.355122&title=Communications+of+the+ACM&volume=43&issue=12&date=2000&spage=45&issn=0001-0782

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167923605000849

Waynemb2 (talk) 15:39, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Additionally, Runhua , I think that we could add some photos or screenshots of different type of recommender systems from popular websites, Amazon, Ebay, etc..

Waynemb2 (talk) 02:44, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Waynemb2 , that's fine. I think it's a good point. But could we find proper photos without any violation of copyrights? Currently, I am working on updating the section about security issues on reputation system. The second source shows a framework for the analysis of different reputation systems, which is good for classifiction section. Runhua (talk) 03:17, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Runhua I was unable to find a good source for the different types of reputation systems, and we are unable to add any photos to accurately represent reputation systems so I have added a new heading section as well as a section on qualities of effective reputation systems.

Waynemb2 (talk) 19:13, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Waynemb2 I think that's fine. I also updated the previous attack section (too short) and extended it. Runhua (talk) 17:03, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

References

Recommendation on Attack and Defense Framework

Attack classification of reputation system is based on the goals of the reputations systems by the attackers.

Attack Type

• Self-promoting Attack. The attacker falsely increases their own reputation
• Whitewashing Attack. The attacker uses some system vulnerability to update their reputation.
• Slandering Attack. The attacker reports false data to lower the reputation of the victim nodes.
• Orchestrated Attack. The attacker orchestrates their efforts and employs several of the above strategies.
• Denial of Service Attack. The attacker prevents the calculation and dissemination of reputation values in reputation systems by using Denial of Service method.

Defense Strategies

Here are some strategies to prevent the above attacks.

• Preventing Multiple Identities
• Mitigating Generation of False Rumors
• Mitigating Spreading of False Rumors
• Preventing Short-Term Abuse of the System
• Mitigating Denial of Service Attacks

Runhua (talk) 04:10, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Howard Rheingold

The whole Online Reputation Systems section is basically about Howard Rheingold. Problem? --katiedert —Preceding unsigned comment added by Katiedert (talk • contribs) 21:19, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I just created this article yesterday. It may reflect some of my own biases, so if something doesn't look right, please fix it or offer suggestions. --Jsnow 03:54, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

• reputation service was pointing to reputation system . ~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alhoori (talk • contribs) 17:31, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Reputation system/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Hello. I'm going to have to fail this article's GA nomination, mainly due to the lack of in-line references. Although there is a list of references at the end of the article, there are no references in the text that show where certain opinions and facts were drawn from. Other problems include:

• The lead should be a summary of the entire article, and should not include information that is not repeated (and referenced) in the body of the article.
• The "Types of reputation systems" section needs to be expanded. Delve further into the differences between the various types, and do a compare and contrast between them. Why do companies choose to use one type over another?
• Who is Howard Rheingold and why is his opinion so important that he gets an entire paragraph devoted to it in an article that's only 9 paragraphs long?
• Lists are discouraged. Try turning the list in the "Other examples of practical applications" section into prose that, again, delves deeper into these applications.
• Is a Sybil attack the only type of attack that can be made on one of these systems?
• The first external link (Reputations systems) deadlinks.
• All of the references need more info. If they are journals, they need the publication in which they appeared. If they are books, they need ISBN numbers. Acronyms (IPTPS, ICDM, etc) need to be spelled out.

This article needs some siginificant work on referencing and expansion before it is of GA status. It is a good beginning, but just that, a beginning. Please let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 18:35, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

recommend adding section on wikipedia reputation system

a short section describing how wikipedia user reputation works would be useful. Ted.strauss (talk) 14:07, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

@Ted.strauss: There is no proper user reputation system on Wikipedia. --Fixuture (talk) 08:04, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Reputation system. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.ecscw.org/2011/04-%20Dencheva%20et%20Al%201-20.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060421215224/http://www.sigcomm.org/sigcomm2005/paper-CheFri.pdf to http://www.sigcomm.org/sigcomm2005/paper-CheFri.pdf
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://eprints.ucl.ac.uk/18812/1/18812.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110607070146/http://www.cs.rice.edu/Conferences/IPTPS02/101.pdf to http://www.cs.rice.edu/Conferences/IPTPS02/101.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:53, 20 January 2018 (UTC)