On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:46 PM, Bod Notbod bodnot...@gmail.com wrote:
snip
I still think we could do with more rewards and maybe this damned game
has given me an answer.
More editor stats.
I think what is needed is some way to measure quality objectively. It
may be that only quantity can
Ideally if we are going to push gammification it should be centered on
quality content primarily.
Gammification is hard to pull off in a way that ensures maintaining quality
in output - because by it's very nature such a system is gameable. And you
will tend to find, anyway, that the most
OTOH quantity has a quality all of its own. So far as I know, there's no
good measure of how much text people have contributed that still remain in
the article.
It would be a really good idea to measure how many unique strings of
characters each editor has added to each article and in general.
Actually, you find that as certain types of articles rise to the level
of being featured (or just improve in general), they usually end up
having being rewritten almost in their entirety. Some of the
information added earlier may still be there, but the wording will
invariably have been changed.
We have FA for those who want to focus on one article, we have
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CUP as a somewhat game like process
for content contributors. What aspect of content contribution do we not have
a game like feature for?
WereSpielChequers
On 1 October 2011 17:01, Thomas
Re the suggestion that edit count is the only universal metric for success.
Editcount is a very long way from being the only universal metric for
success.
Length of Tenure and cleanliness of block record are just as universal.
Adminship and other userights, are also universal, though I'd concede
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 11:15 AM, WereSpielChequers
werespielchequ...@gmail.com wrote:
Re the suggestion that edit count is the only universal metric for success.
Editcount is a very long way from being the only universal metric for
success.
Length of Tenure and cleanliness of block record
Editor since 2007 is instantly understandable to everyone, I would say it is
at least as easily understood as editcount
I've never had to explain what a clean blocklog was, and I don't recall
having to explain barnstars. Toolserver access, yes I have explained to
people, but even our most
On 1 October 2011 18:15, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
The assumption Presumably anything that still remains is of
sufficient quality for whatever level the article is has so much
wrong with it that I don't know where to start.
No, if material lasts for a long period in an
