Brian Butterworth wrote:
How about using a two-frame page as the link with a "rate this link"
option shown as a one-line toolbar at the top of the page? Users
could then rate the appropriateness of the link from "wrong" to
"fantastic", which would allow automatic removal of incorrect links
and an simple administration list of links considered "poor".
That was another idea we had, both from the perspective of feeding
meta-data back to Wikipedia and also getting end-users to moderate
links, although in our use-case we had the system helping journalists in
finding relevant external link material, the one's they chose from the
complete list were marked as known 'good' meta-data for the story and
fed back into the system (and if they had the time they could mark 'bad'
suggestions as well).
So for example if you choose a MuddyBoots 'red' report [1] (i.e.
requires moderation) you'll see there are far more links that *could* be
relevant to the article and the journalists could choose from these and
add them to a news story, thus creating a feedback mechanism into the
system.
[1]
http://muddyboots.rattleresearch.com/cgi-bin/mb.cgi?action=page&id=714&report_type=red
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
