Hoi, To belabour the point, we do make errors, we will fail in expectations. What we need is not complaining that the world is not perfect, we need to have an approach that will improve our data and is inclusive. We need to be more of a wiki. Thanks, GerardM
On 25 November 2015 at 04:57, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com wrote:
this isnt about how or whats of Google its about ensuring that what we do is trustworthy
On 25 November 2015 at 08:12, Andreas Kolbe jayen466@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:26 PM, Leila Zia leila@wikimedia.org wrote:
It's worth mentioning:
Dominant search engines do not rely on one source of information to
surface
results, they get information from many sources, weigh the responses
they
get based on the trust on the sources and many other factors, and
aggregate
to find the best answer to be shown to the user.
Have you never seen Google display gross Wikipedia vandalism?[1][2] Cases like that make it very clear that the Wikimedia content in question
entered
Google directly, without human oversight or cross-checking against other sources. What you describe sounds good, but it didn't happen.
If even transient vandalism passes through (the Finnish vandalism was reportedly deleted in Wikipedia within minutes), then so can more subtle and long-lived errors and falsehoods.
Similarly, Bing Satori's timeline is simply made up of verbatim Wikipedia sentences containing a numerical year.
We know far too little about how search engines import Wikipedia and Wikidata content, and what proportion of content is checked and how.
I just used "chicken pox" as a search query in Google, I see an
information
box on the right-hand-side of the page about the disease, and when I
click
on Sources I get this page <
https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/2364942?p=medical_conditions&...
("See where we found the medical information") which shows all the
sources
Google has used to retrieve information about chicken pox from, nothing
in
that list starts with wiki. Of course, this is not the case for all
search
queries, for some of them, Google still uses Wikipedia snippets.
For medical queries, Google (rightly) prefers other sources, so those queries are not presently affected.
[1]
https://www.seroundtable.com/google-world-series-cardinals-blunder-17587.htm...
[2]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikipedia_vandalism_in_Google_infobo...
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- GN. President Wikimedia Australia WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe