Brian J Mingus wrote:
o Note that featured articles are easy to
predict.
* *A* articles are /correlated/ with Number of references, PageRank,
Number of external links, Number of images, Article age (page-id).
o Note that A articles are extremely hard to predict. All of
the above A predictors are weaker than all of the featured
predictors. This class should be merged with another quality
class.
I wonder if this is because most projects don't have a proper A-class
grading scheme, and often editors will just give A-grade article to GA
(or even pre-GA class article) without much thought.
I wonder if your results would be stronger if you limited the analysis
to A-class articles of projects that have an A-class review process
(MILHIST and...?).
* *G *articles are /correlated/ with Number of
external links,
Number of templates, Number of references, Automated Readability
Index, Flesh-Kincaid Grade Level
* *G* articles are /negatively correlated/ with Length of article
HTML, Flesch Reading Ease, Smog Grading
o Note that G articles are extremely hard to predict and
should be merged with another quality class.
Interesting. I presume you mean Good Article (GA) class here. I wonder
why those results are week - is it because Good Article reviewers
standards vary much more widely than the Featured Article reviewers
standards?
--
Piotr Konieczny
"To be defeated and not submit, is victory; to be victorious and rest on
one's laurels, is defeat." --Józef Piłsudski