Ingo Frost wrote:
Dear Andrew Lih,
dear scientific community,
I am a bit disappointed about the available material
that tries to measure the quality of Wikipedia articles.
The quoted newspaper article of the Wall street journal
for example just analyses technical topics but it would
be a dangerous claim to assume that quality is equally
distributed over the different fields and topics.
But you need that claim as condition for the method
of randomly picking articles and conclude for the rest.
Journalists aren't searching for knowledge - they just want
to tell a story.
My question: Is there a scientific study on the
quality of the Wikipedia ariticles? Does anyone
work on that problems? What methods could be used
to analyse the Quality?
The only serious and promising attemt I know of is Andreas Brändle's
Ulrich Fuchs did a little test on vandalising articles:
His approach is not fully scientific but still better then any
Journalist's or Wikipedian's attemt. See also