What would you mean by "superfluous templates"? Infoboxes and such?
Juliana.
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Craig Franklin <cfranklin(a)wikimedia.org.au
The obvious problem I see is that adding a lot of
bytes to an article
doesn't necessarily equate to adding a lot of *value* to an article. On
enwiki at least, it's probably very easy to inflate the bytecount by
inserting superfluous templates and the like into an article, without
actually adding any content. At most I'd recommend using it as a rough
guide for students as to when an article *may* be ready, and then assess
the articles qualitatively after that.
Cheers,
Craig
On 28 January 2014 11:12, Juliana Bastos Marques <domusaurea(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
*NOT a CFP!* ;)
Hello all!
I have been thinking about using the criterion of a minimum number of
bytes to evaluate the students' edits for my next course - together with
content, of course. This came up because I noticed some students were
editing as little as possible, and this time I want the whole group to
start new articles from scratch.
Has anyone used this approach? Pros/cons? What would you consider a
reasonable number for the minimum of bytes in the final article?
Juliana.
--
www.domusaurea.org
_______________________________________________
Education mailing list
Education(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education
_______________________________________________
Education mailing list
Education(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/education