Hoi,
You want to compare it to the Reasonator item. It has all the right links
for 43 award winners. That is 100% I did not have problems telling
Wikipedians that there link was wrong. The information is there and there
are more 'blue' links than in Wikipedia.

The proof is in the pudding. For simple lists and links Wikidata is hands
down superior.
Thanks,
      GerardM

On 26 January 2016 at 12:21, Andreas Kolbe <jayen...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 4:32 PM, Gerard Meijssen <
> gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hoi,
> > Eh, wrong link ...
> > http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2016/01/wikipedia-20-error-rate.html
> >
> > On 25 January 2016 at 17:29, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hoi,
> > > I regularly blog. It was mentioned in one of my blogposts [1].. By the
> > way
> > > the obvious would be to do some research yourself. Paper tigers [2] are
> > > those tigers that rely on what others have to say,
> > > Thanks.,
> > >       GerardM
> > >
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> >
> http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2016/01/wikipedia-recovery-and-mental-health.html
> > > [2] http://www.letusdiy.org/uploads/userup/0911/3000041GC2.jpg
> >
>
>
> Gerard,
>
> You say in your January 2016 blog post,
>
> ------------
>
> The article on the Spearman Medal is a case in point. This medal is
> conferred by the British Psychological Society to psychologists. There were
> 19 links and two were wrong. One link was to a soccer and one to a football
> player. The award is conferred since 1965 so there ought to be quite a
> number of red links
>
> With two sportsmen attributed to winning the Spearman Medal there was an
> error rate of 20%.
>
> ------------
>
> Looking at the current version of the [[Spearman Medal]] article,[1] last
> touched in August 2014 (i.e. well before your blog post), I find it
> contains 20 (not 19) blue links in its List of medal winners (along with a
> bunch of red links).
>
> Looking at the blue links, I find only one soccer/football player (Richard
> Crisp), not two. However, there is also a research climatologist
> specialising in viticulture (Gregory V. Jones).
>
> These two would seem quite obviously to be wrong, given that the Spearman
> Medal is given to psychologists. So I agree with you that at least two blue
> links lead to the wrong person.
>
> I don't agree with your percentage calculation: if 2 out of 20 blue links
> lead to the wrong person, that makes an error rate of 10% (not 20%).
>
> I note that only two of the names in the list have references. That's just
> as bad as Wikidata. :)
>
> The saving grace is that at least the article cites a British Psychological
> Society webpage in its lead where an official list of medal winners[2] is
> linked. Frankly, I would consider that page a better reference than the
> Wikipedia page. It's good to see that it outranks the Wikipedia page in
> search engines.
>
> Speaking more broadly, I don't think you'll find me disagreeing with you
> that Wikipedia quality leaves much to be desired. I have written plenty
> about Wikipedia's reliability problems.
>
> However, I consider the requirement for reliable sources to be a key factor
> in whatever quality improvement there has been in Wikipedia. Moreover, the
> presence of sources very often gives readers access to more reliable
> material than Wikipedia itself (as indeed is the case in the Spearman Medal
> article). That is useful.
>
> In my view, much of Wikipedia has been and continues to be substandard. But
> without references, Wikidata's reliability problems are likely to be even
> greater than those of Wikipedia.
>
> Andreas
>
> [1]
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Spearman_Medal&oldid=620735680
> [2]
>
> http://www.bps.org.uk/what-we-do/bps/history-psychology-centre/history-society/society-award-winners/spearman-medal/spearman-medal
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: 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