Phroziac wrote:
No way would we fit in the 30 volumes of
Britannica for this
hypothetical print release! Anyway, what if we had a feature in the
Wikipedia 1.0 idea, where we could rate how useful the inclusion of an
article in a print version would be. This would allow anyone making a
print version, be it the foundation, or someone else, to trim wikipedia
easier. Certainly you could do it by hand, but eek. that's huge. With
our current database dumps, it would already not be unreasonable to make
a script to automatically remove articles with stub tags in them.
Obviously these would be worthless in a print version.
In my opinion, an article ranking system would be an ideal way to
start collecting data for trying to place articles in rank order for
inclusion in a fixed amount of space.
One interesting possibility is, in addition to user rankings, using
the number of times the article's title is mentioned on the web -- the
Google test -- as an extra input to any hypothetical ranking system.
The thing to remember if a ranking system is used is that it is a tool
rather than a solution. It can point to problem articles that need
work. We don't need to be limited to a single algorithm for evaluating
an article. The Google test can be added, but so can others too.
Ec