Hello, That is very interesting. I don't know what she or he is referring to... How would the equation exactly look like?
As there are rules about content, and as the final goal is to provide recipients with content they appreciate, I think that the equation would lack important factors. From the point of view of a certain discipline, it might be enough to think "if content is not reverted/deleted by other editors, then it is okay". Other researchers say: "I don't know whether this piece of content is encyclopedic or according to the rules, as long as I have not seen it with my own eyes." For example: https://ksh.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Faassefeld&oldid=763862 This article has not been deleted, but still it does not comply with the Wikipedia rules. (The Wikipedia language version is Ripuarian, but the text has been obviously copied from nds-nl.wp.) Also: what is productivity, does this only relate to text or other content "produced" specifically for that wiki? If someone translates text, or imports texts, is that the same kind of "productivity"? Kind regards Ziko Am Di., 2. Okt. 2018 um 05:51 Uhr schrieb Alex Yarovoy <yarovoy.a...@gmail.com>: > > I'm working on a research paper and one of the reviewers has commented that > "There is even a Wikipedia measure called productivity, which is > essentially the amount of text produced over time less the reverted text" > > Anybody familiar with that metric of "productivity"? > > Any pointers would be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks in advance, > Ofer > _______________________________________________ > Wiki-research-l mailing list > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
