I thought we created earlier rubrics in 2009, but not sure what got pushed
out to ambassadors.
 On Feb 1, 2014 9:41 AM, "Juliana Bastos Marques" <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Thank, Jon. I'd also love to know about the requirements of other
> Wikipedias, they may not be the same.
>
> James, I believe we always have some room for experimentation in grading.
> Countries are different, schools are different, courses are different,
> goals are different. Guidelines are great (aren't we just creating them
> right now?), but they should not be rules, IMHO.
>
> Juliana.
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Jon Beasley-Murray <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Juliana:
>>
>> This question has been asked a lot on wiki.  The following link might
>> help a first stab at an answer:
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_articles/By_length
>>
>> Though I'm not sure how accurate the list is, as #4156 on the list (
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Irene_%282005%29) as well as
>> #4160 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_Brown_Saw_the_Baseball_Game)
>> both appear to be rather shorter than #4161 (
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boletus_luridus).
>>
>> See also:
>>
>> *
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Featured_articles/Archive_6#Which_is_the_SHORTEST_Featured_article_.28by_length.29.3F
>> *
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_criteria/Archive_7#Article_length_criteria
>> *
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_candidates/archive24#When_an_article_simply_has_no_more_information.
>> ..
>> *
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_candidates/archive31#Notability.2C_etc
>> *
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_candidates/archive31#Followup_on_500-word_FACs
>>
>> and so on.
>>
>> Take care
>>
>> Jon
>>
>> On Jan 29, 2014, at 3:31 PM, Juliana Bastos Marques <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > If you allow me, perhaps I should rephrase:
>> >
>> > ***After all requirements of quality are assessed and evaluated***,
>> what would you consider a reasonable number for the minimum of bytes in the
>> final article?
>> >
>> > Indeed, maybe this question overlaps with some of the criteria for
>> GA/FA, but I also suppose they are not the same for all Wikipedias.
>> >
>> > Juliana.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Jon Beasley-Murray <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>> > Well, a little unfair perhaps.  The education program was not a single
>> thing, and I certainly acknowledge your own valuable contributions
>> throughout, that consistently ensured (and continue to ensure) a more
>> thoughtful approach to counteract the editcountitis and bytecountitis that
>> was prevalent in other quarters.  Still, there's no denying that the focus
>> on quantity (seemingly at the expense of quality) has always been, and
>> continues to be, one of the major sources of tension between the education
>> program and the Wikipedia community.  Hence there is good reason to think
>> and talk in other ways about how to assess and encourage student work.
>> >
>> > Take care
>> >
>> > Jon
>> >
>> > On Jan 29, 2014, at 1:23 PM, Sage Ross <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 4:04 AM, Jon Beasley-Murray
>> > > <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >>
>> > >> In short, focussing single-mindedly on bytes contributed (as the WMF
>> has repeatedly done in the past) in counterproductive and goes directly
>> against Wikipedia's own criteria for what are (rightly) valued as its most
>> important and valuable contributions.
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > > Jon, I think you're being unfair here. Despite being much harder to
>> > > measure, quality has been part of WMF's education programs since the
>> > > beginning. During the Public Policy Initiative, we created a system
>> > > for quantifying article quality (and how the work of student editors
>> > > impacted it) that was directly based on WP:WIAFA [1].
>> > >
>> > > It should be uncontroversial to say that what we -- and by "we" I mean
>> > > both WMF and the editing community -- want is large quantities *of*
>> > > high quality content. From what I saw, the leaderboards were pretty
>> > > effective at motivating a handful of most involved classes during the
>> > > Public Policy Initiative -- classes with instructors who were the most
>> > > into the goal of improving Wikipedia -- and for those classes, the
>> > > quality was also high. For the classes that were doing lower quality
>> > > work, from what I remember they were also the ones that did not take
>> > > an interest in the leaderboard. (I also suggest that the Pune pilot
>> > > would have gone just as badly with or without leaderboards; counting
>> > > bytes was not among its critical problems.)
>> > >
>> > > (I agree that, for evaluating an individual student's work, bytes
>> > > added is not a great metric, and in general there are some dangers to
>> > > incentives based on quantity of text.)
>> > >
>> > > [1] =
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_United_States_Public_Policy/Assessment
>> > >
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > Education mailing list
>> > > [email protected]
>> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Education mailing list
>> > [email protected]
>> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > www.domusaurea.org
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Education mailing list
>> > [email protected]
>> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Education mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education
>>
>
>
>
> --
> www.domusaurea.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Education mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education
>
>
_______________________________________________
Education mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education

Reply via email to