On 5/16/2012 11:04 PM, wikien-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
Message: 1 Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 21:14:12 -0400 From: Gwern Branwengwern0@gmail.com To: English Wikipediawikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] "How the Professor Who Fooled Wikipedia Got Caught by Reddit", _The Atlantic_ Message-ID: CAMwO0gyGeZA0j0ksTz3uNjdUH3zBGY3gqHH7KeTynSz82UFVxA@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Incidentally, I have been finishing an experiment involving the removal of 100 random external links by an IP; I haven't analyzed it yet, so I don't know the outcome, but this gives us an opportunity!
Would anyone in this thread (especially the ones convinced Wikipedia's editing community is in fine shape) care to predict what percentage or percentage range they expect will have been reverted?
Or what percentage/percentage range they would regard as an acceptable failure-to-revert rate?
I just went through 19 random pages (9 of them didn't have any ELs, so I didn't count them, and I found three articles in which the last EL was not a useful link. One of them was a spam link to a (non-WMF) wikiproject, one was a link to a find-a-grave page with a photo of the subject (unneeded because we already had a photo of the subject), and the third was a link to the presidential library in which a specific judge's papers are archived. (That last would be relevant in an article about the judge, but not so much for the article about the district court for which he was the chief justice for ten years; I actually went and added the link to the article on the judge, which didn't have such a link.) That looks like a 30% fail rate. We'll see how many of them get reverted, but I suspect that it won't be many, because I didn't go through and randomly remove ELs, and I edited logged in; for some reason, people who have been administrators for four years with over 18,000 edits tend to get reverted far less than IP editors. (Go figure.)
On 19/05/2012 11:21 a.m., Horologium wrote:
On 5/16/2012 11:04 PM, wikien-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
Incidentally, I have been finishing an experiment involving the removal of 100 random external links by an IP; I haven't analyzed it yet, so I don't know the outcome, but this gives us an opportunity!
Would anyone in this thread (especially the ones convinced Wikipedia's editing community is in fine shape) care to predict what percentage or percentage range they expect will have been reverted?
Or what percentage/percentage range they would regard as an acceptable failure-to-revert rate?
I just went through 19 random pages (9 of them didn't have any ELs, so I didn't count them, and I found three articles in which the last EL was not a useful link. One of them was a spam link to a (non-WMF) wikiproject, one was a link to a find-a-grave page with a photo of the subject (unneeded because we already had a photo of the subject), and the third was a link to the presidential library in which a specific judge's papers are archived. (That last would be relevant in an article about the judge, but not so much for the article about the district court for which he was the chief justice for ten years; I actually went and added the link to the article on the judge, which didn't have such a link.) That looks like a 30% fail rate. We'll see how many of them get reverted, but I suspect that it won't be many, because I didn't go through and randomly remove ELs, and I edited logged in; for some reason, people who have been administrators for four years with over 18,000 edits tend to get reverted far less than IP editors. (Go figure.)
In my experience the external links section is maybe a little bit sloppier than the rest of an article. Probably because of drive by edits, spammers, and good faith edits by lazy editors (those who want to add something but take the easy option). The guideline at WP:EL is pretty good.
Alan Liefting
On 19 May 2012 00:21, Horologium user.horologium@gmail.com wrote:
I just went through 19 random pages (9 of them didn't have any ELs, so I didn't count them, and I found three articles in which the last EL was not a useful link. One of them was a spam link to a (non-WMF) wikiproject, one was
Did you test first links, incidentally? My anecdotal experience has been that someone adding a spammy link is more likely to add it to the top of the list than someone adding a non-spammy one would be...