Textual and factual quality are different. Often we spellcheck an article
and claim it to be of good quality, but I believe that is the lesser
problem although it is part of the overall quality.
Den søn. 16. apr. 2017, 18.59 skrev Ziko van Dijk <zvandijk(a)gmail.com>om>:
Hello John,
Article quality is an interesting subject. I guess that it depends
extremely on what is the scientific discipline you come from, and what
questions you want to be answered. A linguist will have a very different
approach than a computer scientist, for example. If you ask me, only a
human being can judge an article if it comes to content quality and textual
quality, by the way. Maybe you want to elaborate on what are your
questions?
Kind regards
Ziko
2017-04-16 9:44 GMT+02:00 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>om>:
Hoi,
How can you check for consistency when you are not able to appreciate if
certain facts (like date of death) exist and are the same? What can you
say
about sources when some Wikipedias insist on
sources in their own
language
and sources in other languages you cannot read?
How do you check for
consistency when we have over 280 Wikipedias with possible content?
Do know that only Wikidata approaches a state where it knows about all
our
projects and we have not, to the best of my
knowledge, assessed what the
quality of Wikidata is on interwiki links.. Case in point, I fixed an
error
today about a person that was said to be dead
because a Commons category
was not correctly linked.
When you study the consistency of English Wikipedia only, you only add to
the current bias in research.
When you want to know about the half life of an error, you can find in
the
history when for instance a date was mentioned
for a first time and find
the same date in another language. This is not trivial as the format of a
language is diverse think Thai for instance.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 16 April 2017 at 02:08, John Erling Blad <jeblad(a)gmail.com> wrote:
This is more about checking consistency between
projects. It is
interesting, but not quite what I was asking about. It is very
interesting
> if it would be possible to say something about half-life of an error.
I'm
pretty
sure this follows number of page views if ordinary logged-in
editing
> is removed.
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 12:08 AM, Gerard Meijssen <
> gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
> > Hoi,
> > Would checking if a date of death exists in articles be of interest
to
you.
> The idea is that Wikidata knows about dates of death and for "living
> people" the fact of a death should be the same in all projects. When
the
> > date of death is missing, there is either an issue at Wikidata (not
the
> > same precision is one) or at a
project.
> >
> > When a difference is found, the idea is that it is each projects
> > responsibility to do what is needed. No further automation.
> > Thanks,
> > GerardM
> >
> > On 15 April 2017 at 23:50, John Erling Blad <jeblad(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> >
> > > Are anyone doing any work on automated quality assurance of
articles?
> Not
> > > the ORES-stuff, that is about creating hints from measured
features.
> I'm
> > > thinking about verifying existence and completeness of citations,
and
> > > structure of logical arguments.
> > >
> > > John
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/ mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
_______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>