There are many situations in which it could be useful to have a way to quantify the quality, rather than just number of articles, of a Wikipedia edition. If the whole formula is flawed, we should find a better one.
Mark 2009/3/23 Nathan <[email protected]>: > On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 12:36 PM, Mark Williamson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> To me, this indicates a problem with the metrics used to calculate depth. >> >> >> > > I'd say it indicates not that the depth calculations need to be tweaked, but > that they are intrinsically inaccurate and not meaningful and should be > disregarded altogether. They foster inter-project competition more than they > accomplish any other task; I personally don't think making projects > competitive (and encouraging work that does little besides increase the > depth mark) is the way to go. > > Nathan > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
