James Heilman wrote:

> We need to make our current Wikipedias simpler. Yes I know it is
> an uphill battle but we just need more people working on it.

That is why, as I have announced previously, I will soon begin raising
money for the human fact-checkers and proofreaders necessary for the
http://mediawiki.org/wiki/Accuracy_review project. It was decided
previously that project had to be run first on the Simple English
Wikipedia. However, there is no reason, as a read-only bot, it can't be run
simultaneously on the ordinary Wikipedias. Given the spectacular abilities
of the first two volunteers, that will not be a problem, I hope.

If the WikiEd Foundation is persuaded to start hiring such fact-checkers
and proofreaders for their students' work, that would be great, but it
would be ideal if they would also pay outright for general accuracy review
of all editors' work, initially on a trial basis, e.g., 50% students'
work and 50% on general edits ordered by the likelihood that they aren't
simple enough syntactically or are out of date in high-readership articles.

I urge those who would like to see an organized, paid, accuracy review
pilot project so that people can evaluate the quality of the resulting
(initially only suggested) edits, to join me in personally asking Frank
Schulenburg to implement such a trial.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to