On 16 April 2010 16:38, Amory Meltzer <[email protected]> wrote: > Three were "on the fence" so while the article may report a 55% > success rate, it also is stating a 32% failure rate.
It's hard to tell from their scoring system which the three borderline ones were, though. Interestingly, the seven "clear failures" exhibit a strong correlation between quality and time - the points get lower as they get older. For the other articles, there's little or no correlation between the time since they passed FAC (or FAR) and their quality. http://www.generalist.org.uk/blog/2010/quality-versus-age-of-wikipedias-featured-articles/ I suspect this points up a problem with maintenance more than initial quality, but we shall see. -- - Andrew Gray [email protected] _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
