On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 8:12 AM, geni <geniice at gmail.com <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>> wrote:
/ On 8 May 2014 01:00, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466 at gmail.com <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>> wrote:
/>/ />/ > As for study design, I'd suggest you begin with a *random* sample of />/ > frequently-viewed Wikipedia articles in a given topic area (e.g. those />/ > within the purview of WikiProject Medicine), have them assessed by an />/ > independent panel of academic experts, and let them publish their />/ results. />/ > />/ > />/ No control, no calibration. Without those you can't really be sure what />/ you've measured. While academic attitudes to Wikipedia may be of some />/ interest they are not a proxy for quality. />/ / "While academic attitudes to Wikipedia may be of some interest they are not a proxy for quality." I don't understand this. I'm not saying I disagree, I just don't understand. How would an attitude be a 'proxy' for quality?
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
