Hi Gerard,
We're diverging from the initial thread. I'll respond to one point, we
should take the rest of the discussion somewhere else. :)
On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>
> So yes, your approach is good but like the translation tool it relies on
> English content.
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>>>>> wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>>>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>> Unsubscribe:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>>>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-r
Hoi,
When you consider Wikidata's data as a predictor of relevance and interest,
the biggest problem is that Wikidata does not hold enough data at this
time. The one approach I find missing in the approach you discuss in your
presentation is local and timely information. Of relevance here are award
Hoi Gerard,
On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Gerard Meijssen
wrote:
>
> When you analyse articles and find that some things are missing, it will
> help a lot when you can target these articles to the people who are likely
> interested. When people interested in soccer learn that a soccer player
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:58 PM, John Erling Blad wrote:
> Definitly part of the overall quality. I wonder, do you have any stats om
> how much positive change the previous attempts have triggered?
>
[John and I went off-list for me to understand which specific previous
attempts he had in mind
Hoi,
This is an interesting avenue. My I suggest one practical side of this?
When you analyse articles and find that some things are missing, it will
help a lot when you can target these articles to the people who are likely
interested. When people interested in soccer learn that a soccer player
d
Definitly part of the overall quality. I wonder, do you have any stats om
how much positive change the previous attempts have triggered?
Den man. 17. apr. 2017, 02.04 skrev Leila Zia :
> Hi John,
>
> This may be of interest to you:
>
> We are working on building recommendation systems than can he
Hi John,
This may be of interest to you:
We are working on building recommendation systems than can help editors
identify how to expand already existing articles in Wikipedia. This
includes but is not limited to identifying what sections are missing from
an article, what citations, what images, i
It is a manual rating system, which can be used for quality improvements.
Cost-less rating systems have a inherit problem with gaming. That can be
counteracted with rating of the raters, often called meta rating. You use
reputation of the raters by observing disagreement and then use that to
calcul
John, the AROWF project GSoC student implemented your proposal last year:
https://github.com/priyankamandikal/arowf/blob/master/backlog.py
She also used WikiWho to suggest review of out-of-date passages, and both
categories and readability metrics to suggest review of unclear passages:
https://g
16, 2017 7:11 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quality assurance of articles
Hoi,
Humans are overrated. I saw this answer on Facebook [1] and [2] compare the two
and tell me why we accept the bias in our editors. Why are we satisfied with
what we write about when there is
Sorry for the sprellig, I write this on a mobile with Norwegian
spellchecker.
Gerrards last question is about coverage, and bias, which is part of the
overall quality for the project as such.
Den søn. 16. apr. 2017, 19.22 skrev John Erling Blad :
> I wrote a proposal a few years ago on how we c
I wrote a proposal a few years ago on how we could identfy some types of
bias. The idea was to compare ranking of pageviews, and notify other
projects about missing articles. I don't think anyone has done any followup
om that
Den søn. 16. apr. 2017, 19.12 skrev Gerard Meijssen <
gerard.meijs...@gm
Textual and factual quality are different. Often we spellcheck an article
and claim it to be of good quality, but I believe that is the lesser
problem although it is part of the overall quality.
Den søn. 16. apr. 2017, 18.59 skrev Ziko van Dijk :
> Hello John,
>
> Article quality is an interestin
Wikimedia Mailing List ,
> Wikimedia Mailing List
>
> *Elküldve:* 2017. április 15. 23:50
> *Tárgy : *[Wikimedia-l] Quality assurance of articles
>
>
> Are anyone doing any work on automated quality assurance of articles? Not
> the ORES-stuff, that is about creating hints from
Hoi,
Humans are overrated. I saw this answer on Facebook [1] and [2] compare the
two and tell me why we accept the bias in our editors. Why are we satisfied
with what we write about when there is more to inform about. Remember what
we aim to achieve. It does not say text, it says share the sum of a
Yes I think using WD to look at stuff like dates of death between different
languages would be interesting.
J
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 1:44 AM, Gerard Meijssen
wrote:
> Hoi,
> How can you check for consistency when you are not able to appreciate if
> certain facts (like date of death) exist and
Hello John,
Article quality is an interesting subject. I guess that it depends
extremely on what is the scientific discipline you come from, and what
questions you want to be answered. A linguist will have a very different
approach than a computer scientist, for example. If you ask me, only a
huma
Hoi,
How can you check for consistency when you are not able to appreciate if
certain facts (like date of death) exist and are the same? What can you say
about sources when some Wikipedias insist on sources in their own language
and sources in other languages you cannot read? How do you check for
c
Agree it is an interesting question. One would need to clearly define what
you mean by an "error" though.
Simple vandalism is a relatively easy category to look at but otherwise it
is complicated.
One has:
1) Unreffed stuff for which one can find a supporting source
2) Text that is partly suppor
This is more about checking consistency between projects. It is
interesting, but not quite what I was asking about. It is very interesting
if it would be possible to say something about half-life of an error. I'm
pretty sure this follows number of page views if ordinary logged-in editing
is removed
Hoi,
Would checking if a date of death exists in articles be of interest to you.
The idea is that Wikidata knows about dates of death and for "living
people" the fact of a death should be the same in all projects. When the
date of death is missing, there is either an issue at Wikidata (not the
same
Are anyone doing any work on automated quality assurance of articles? Not
the ORES-stuff, that is about creating hints from measured features. I'm
thinking about verifying existence and completeness of citations, and
structure of logical arguments.
John
23 matches
Mail list logo