Wall Street Journal (online) [1] had two days ago a long article on Lsjbot, yesterday being their fourth most read article.
it was followed up yesterday by articles in media in Brazil, Poland, (arabian paper), France, Australia Huffington Post etc
It will now in a few hours time be an interview in BBC World New with Sverker (Lsjbot owner) where also Jimmy Wales will participate
Anders Lsbot has for this round today generated over 100 000 articles on plant species, and progessing with around 10000 a day An example [2]
[1] http://online.wsj.com/articles/for-this-author-10-000-wikipedia-articles-is-...
[2] https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyathea_dregei http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/07/15/sverker-johansson-wikiped_n_5587008.html
Anders,
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Anders Wennersten mail@anderswennersten.se wrote:
Whilst you are doing some good things with these bot-created articles, I do have some concerns.
Mainly, the fact that there is no human intervention in the creation process.
I have found myself having to remove, frankly speaking, useless galleries on some of the articles created by your bot.
Take "Mexico" on Cebuano WP[1] which had a gallery made up of images from [[Category:Mexico]] (the country) on Commons. The Commonscat link on that article also links to the Commons category for the country. Or the Cebuano article for "Astraeus"[2] which had a gallery made up of images relating to Astraeus Airlines. The Commonscat link is also the airline, and the images were pulled from that article.
What sort of quality control is occurring to ensure that this isn't widespread....these are not the only examples I've had to remove imagery totally unrelated to the subject, and makes me question whether having a bot creating hundreds of thousands of stubbish articles is really the best way to go about content creation.
Russavia
[1] https://ceb.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mexico_(mga_mananap)&oldid=4... [2] https://ceb.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Astraeus&oldid=4367459
I agree.
It may be a good solution to "patch" the losing of editors... if there is no plan for community support.
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Russavia russavia.wikipedia@gmail.com wrote:
Anders,
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Anders Wennersten mail@anderswennersten.se wrote:
Whilst you are doing some good things with these bot-created articles, I do have some concerns.
Mainly, the fact that there is no human intervention in the creation process.
I have found myself having to remove, frankly speaking, useless galleries on some of the articles created by your bot.
Take "Mexico" on Cebuano WP[1] which had a gallery made up of images from [[Category:Mexico]] (the country) on Commons. The Commonscat link on that article also links to the Commons category for the country. Or the Cebuano article for "Astraeus"[2] which had a gallery made up of images relating to Astraeus Airlines. The Commonscat link is also the airline, and the images were pulled from that article.
What sort of quality control is occurring to ensure that this isn't widespread....these are not the only examples I've had to remove imagery totally unrelated to the subject, and makes me question whether having a bot creating hundreds of thousands of stubbish articles is really the best way to go about content creation.
Russavia
[1] https://ceb.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mexico_(mga_mananap)&oldid=4... [2] https://ceb.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Astraeus&oldid=4367459
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
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org