[WikiEN-l] Wired: Wikipedia to Color Code Untrustworthy Text

[FT2]

Agree - trust scores are likely to be divisive and easily gamed. I do not
think "trust score league tables" will help the project.

However as they are also good ways to spot problems and see the "reliability
profile" of an article on review, perhaps some way might be found to make
some of their results available, in some limited manner? Admin only??

On the assumption admins are trusted anyway so they don't have such a vested
interest in numbers, but they might be interested in problem editorship.

The other view is if you can see the aging or trust profile of the article,
that's all you need. low trust-score users may simply be legitimate but
inexperienced, bold and reverted, etc. There are other ways to ID problem
editors, and if you need to know who wrote a specific sentence you can
always use WikiBlame to check the history.

So overall I would say you don't need to publish trust scores of users, and
even telling a user their own trust score is merely a toehold into self
promotion/gaming at best. People should edit, not be encouraged to keep
scorecards.....

FT2




On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 2:37 AM, Nathan Russell <windrunner at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 9:34 PM, Emily Monroe<bluecaliocean at me.com> wrote:
> >> Or perhaps it is a reputation score - my memory is fuzzy.
> >
> > Either way, I would like the score to NOT be published. I'd hate to
> > have the community divided over a piece of software.
> >
> > Emily
>
> There's also the possibility for "gaming the system" by, e.g., making
> subtle expansions that are very unlikely to be reverted to articles
> that don't get much attention.  Unless the algorithm is more complex
> than I thought.
>
> Pakaran
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>