Thanks Lane -- I'm very happy that we were able to help with this project! -Toby
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 1:05 PM, Lane Rasberry <[email protected]>wrote: > Hello Analytics list! > > I am following up on a thread I started in October 2013 in which I asked > for guidance about framing claims on the popularity of Wikipedia's health > content. > <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/analytics/2013-October/001085.html> > Thank you all. With the help of your comments I got a feature article > published in BMJ, the "British Medical Journal". Even though I did not > engage you all in conversation I really put a lot of thought into > everything you all wrote, and found the response very encouraging. > > In this article in various ways I said "Health content on Wikipedia is > more requested and accessed than comparable information from most other > sources." When I originally wrote to this board I asked for analytic > backing to say this, and I appreciate the comments that I got. If anyone in > the future would like to talk more about Wikipedia's health traffic then > please post to this board and contact me or contact me and others through > WikiProject Medicine on English Wikipedia. My article is "Wikipedia: what > it is and why it matters for healthcare" and it can be accessed by those > with a BMJ magazine subscription at the first link or through an > alternative method in the second link. > <http://www.bmj.com/content/348/bmj.g2478> > < > http://bluerasberry.com/2014/04/wikipedia-and-health-information-published-in-bmj/ > > > > I also wish to respond to the common concern that people ought not get > their health information from Wikipedia, and I wanted to share with you all > what I tell people when they ask me why I care about Wikipedia's health > information. Wikipedia is an extremely popular source of health > information, and it is also a source with quality problems. All other > sources of health information are unpopular, and they may or may not have > good quality. It is my opinion that it would be less expensive by orders of > magnitude to improve the quality of Wikipedia's health information than it > would be to increase the popularity and accessibility of any other source > or health information to a level of accessibility comparable to Wikipedia. > Right now the Wikimedia movement is not imagined as a public or global > health movement, but I feel that there is something here and that analytics > might be the argument on which to base a call to action. > > The request I originally expressed to this board still stands - I still > would like whatever information might be available describing the audience > accessing health content on Wikipedia, and I think comprehensive > information would be appreciated in health more than anywhere else in a > Wikimedia project. > > Thank you all, and thank you again if you commented months ago. > > yours, > > > On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 12:15 PM, Jonathan Morgan <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Can I just say how geektastically awesome it is that we're having a >> discussion about how to frame claims about Wikipedia's popularity? Now this >> is what lists are FOR. >> >> But in the interest of avoiding >> stasis<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasis_(rhetoric)#Stasis>, >> I also want to say to Lane: don't sweat the language too much ;) You're not >> going to be spouting untruths or despoiling the brand if you say Wikipedia >> is the, or one of the, highest trafficked websites in the world for health >> info. Wikipedia researchers make claims like that frequently, and often >> with less data to back it up than you're offering. >> >> Also, Lane: do you want someone to script up that pageview request? I >> agree with Erik that using WP Med/WP Health categories will get you better >> results. I've been on the hook for getting some similar data for >> Biosthmores for about... 6 months now. I could work on it on my own time >> some evening this week. >> >> - J >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 5:15 PM, Lars Aronsson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 10/04/2013 11:39 PM, Matthew Flaschen wrote: >>> >>>> "Search engines increasingly lead people to Wikipedia, which is one of >>>> the factors in making Wikipedia the single highest traffic source of health >>>> information in the world." >>>> >>> >>> I can search for images, but only when they have words >>> associated with them, e.g. descriptions, tags or categories. >>> >>> In this sense, doctors examining a patient and giving them >>> a diagnosis is similar to tagging an image. Suddenly, the >>> illness that this patient felt becomes possible to search. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Lars Aronsson ([email protected]) >>> Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Analytics mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Jonathan T. Morgan >> Learning Strategist >> Wikimedia Foundation >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Analytics mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics >> >> > > > -- > Lane Rasberry > user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia > 206.801.0814 > [email protected] > > > On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 12:15 PM, Jonathan Morgan <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Can I just say how geektastically awesome it is that we're having a >> discussion about how to frame claims about Wikipedia's popularity? Now this >> is what lists are FOR. >> >> But in the interest of avoiding >> stasis<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasis_(rhetoric)#Stasis>, >> I also want to say to Lane: don't sweat the language too much ;) You're not >> going to be spouting untruths or despoiling the brand if you say Wikipedia >> is the, or one of the, highest trafficked websites in the world for health >> info. Wikipedia researchers make claims like that frequently, and often >> with less data to back it up than you're offering. >> >> Also, Lane: do you want someone to script up that pageview request? I >> agree with Erik that using WP Med/WP Health categories will get you better >> results. I've been on the hook for getting some similar data for >> Biosthmores for about... 6 months now. I could work on it on my own time >> some evening this week. >> >> - J >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 5:15 PM, Lars Aronsson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 10/04/2013 11:39 PM, Matthew Flaschen wrote: >>> >>>> "Search engines increasingly lead people to Wikipedia, which is one of >>>> the factors in making Wikipedia the single highest traffic source of health >>>> information in the world." >>>> >>> >>> I can search for images, but only when they have words >>> associated with them, e.g. descriptions, tags or categories. >>> >>> In this sense, doctors examining a patient and giving them >>> a diagnosis is similar to tagging an image. Suddenly, the >>> illness that this patient felt becomes possible to search. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Lars Aronsson ([email protected]) >>> Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Analytics mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Jonathan T. Morgan >> Learning Strategist >> Wikimedia Foundation >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Analytics mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics >> >> > > > -- > Lane Rasberry > user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia > 206.801.0814 > [email protected] > > > > -- > Lane Rasberry > user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia > 206.801.0814 > [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > Analytics mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics > >
_______________________________________________ Analytics mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
