Thomas Dalton wrote: > On 27 April 2010 20:50, Charles Matthews > <charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com> wrote: > >> Nihiltres wrote: >> >>> <snip> >>> I strongly believe that showing very prominently the level of review a >>> given article—or even a given *revision* thereof—has received, and the >>> perceived level of quality involved, is a good thing. The Wikipedia 1.0 >>> assessment system (Stub, Start, C, B, A, GA, FA…) seems to serve as a >>> decent start for that sort of thing. >>> >> If we are honest with ourselves, we would admit that we really need >> levels 1 to 10 for articles. It seems already to be hard to get an A, >> fairly much impossible to get GA for an "average" topic, and as we know >> only 1 in 1000 is FA (in round terms). And "expert review" = FA+ is >> another quite defensible level. I think cutting to the chase, setting >> substub = 1 and reviewed FA = 10 might be a great timesaver, and help a >> process in which less "mystique" attached to the whole business. >> Rebooting with FA = 9 sounds quite fun. >> > > I realised a few months ago that it had been ages since I'd actually > done anything significant in the main namespace, so I decided to have > a go at writing an article. With a little help from someone that > turned up and started improving the article (in true wiki-fashion), I > got it to GA fairly easily. It was at best an "average" topic - it was > my local (about 700 year old) church. FAC is very difficult to get > through, but GA is entirely doable. > > I think adding more levels would make the distinctions more arbitrary, > which seems like a bad thing to me. I think we should remove a level, > in fact. The current system at the top with A, GA and FA is very > confusing. I think GA and A should be merged somehow (perhaps just get > rid of A). > > Well, the research I remember says the transition from B to A makes the most difference to the reader. So I would make that central to any system: from 5 to 6, say. I have seen perfectly decent articles labelled "Start" - I mean articles with say five paras of solid, verifiable factual information. I doubt standards are even across the wiki, but if those are "Start" there have to be a couple of rungs on the ladder below that.; or Start = 3. I see that mathematics uses B+ anyway, so that the lower side has five grades already. There does seem to be some problem with A right now, but abolishing it in such a fashion to reduce incentives to push articles up would really be a bad idea (whatever your anecdotal example says).
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