On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 12:29 PM, Carl (CBM) <[email protected]> wrote: [snip] > For example, imagine a well-meaning newbie who sees that our article > "Logic" starts with "Logic is the study of reasoning." This newbie > might change that to "Logic is the art and science of correct > deduction", which is a priori reasonable. They would not know that > people have argued over the first sentence in detail and that the > present wording is a compromise between the many definitions of > "logic" available in reliable sources. [snip]
We sometimes use HTML comments in the wikitext to note traps like this. Perhaps that is a good practice which should be encouraged? On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 10:28 AM, David Gerard <[email protected]> wrote: [snip] > Creating forests of redirects is useful to the reader. Certainly to me > as a reader. Agreed. We can't disclose the raw search request feed because people sometimes plug confidential information into the search box (e.g. accidentally pasting a password or a whole email there) but we could probably release some kind of aggregate. For example, release search strings which came from at least X distinct subnets during the day/week/month. When the (insufficiently anonymized) AOL search data was released I took the top query terms where there were no wikipedia articles and went about making redirects: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gmaxwell/seo I'd like to think it helped... There are probably more from that list which could stand to be created. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
