Re: [WikiEN-l] Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0
On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 6:20 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote: > I think in fact that the headline is misleading. This isn't really > a case of Britannica taking on Wikipedia. It is more like they > may have seen Veropedia in their rear view mirror, and gotten > scared. A peer reviewed study that unfavorably compared > Britannica with Veropedia in terms of timeliness, scope and > accuracy would be quite devastating to Britannica, since > Veropedia also vets its contents. Was that before or after Veropedia dropped off the face of the planet, the company that runs it was administratively dissolved by the state, and the founder was spotted begging Obama for government handouts? ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[WikiEN-l] Article in the UK's Independent
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/features/is-wikipedia-cracking-up-1543527.html An article that isn't half bad, for a change. Nathan -- Your donations keep Wikipedia running! Support the Wikimedia Foundation today: http://www.wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Flagged Revisions: de:wp 99.5% reviewed
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Charles Matthews wrote: > Peter Jacobi wrote: >> OTOH, requiring references for each addition would solve the >> problem in the other direction. >> >> > Every time I've discussed specifics of "flags" I have come away confused I'm hoping it will work in practice like wikisource, where there are four levels of approval as a text goes through the various transcription and proofreading stages. But I may be misunderstanding the differences. To see flagged revisions in action, as far as I'm aware, the best thing to do is go to the German Wikipedia or a test wiki (is there one?). Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Flagged Revisions: de:wp 99.5% reviewed
Peter Jacobi wrote: > OTOH, requiring references for each addition would solve the > problem in the other direction. > > Every time I've discussed specifics of "flags" I have come away confused (admittedly, that is not very often). But, as I understand it, it is technically possible to have numerous types of flags. Therefore it is surely possible to adapr the system to cover referencing issues. I think that the argument that no flagged revision system can exclude 100% of bad edits is the wrong argument, given our tradition of "soft security" where each vetting process may only catch 90% of problems: we should be grateful for that 90%. So if there is a rather small percentage of edits that are missed by the reviewing system, I would suggest some secondary flagging to handle those, taking them out of the main system. At the very least, it is a good idea to reduce duplication of work. Charles ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Flagged Revisions: de:wp 99.5% reviewed
I've just checked a small sample of >10d unreviewed changes from the list. About 50% are not reviewed for unknown reasons, the can (and I have) be given the flag within 30 seconds of reading (style changes, URL changes). The other half are unreferenced additions to articles nobody cares about (small towns, biograohies of rather unknown persons, unimportant music groups). This relates to Thomas' posting: Thomas Dalton : > As I understand it, the German implementation has quite strict > requirements for flagging. The suggestions on the English Wikipedia > seem to be more about just stopping obvious vandalism. It can't be said for sure, whether these additions are vandalism (jokes) or valid ones. Bayesian statistics would suggest just reviewing them, as they are more likely not vandalism. OTOH, requiring references for each addition would solve the problem in the other direction. Regards, Peter -- Jetzt 1 Monat kostenlos! GMX FreeDSL - Telefonanschluss + DSL für nur 17,95 Euro/mtl.!* http://dsl.gmx.de/?ac=OM.AD.PD003K11308T4569a ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
