Hi,
as per Jimbo's suggestion, I have started a voting page for the various ways to reform the article count. Please see
http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_count_reform
for the details. In short,
March 13th, 20:00 GMT is the deadline for proposals/discussion and the beginning of the voting phase
March 17th, 20:00 GMT is the end of the voting phase.
The voting system used is average voting, meaning you can assign a "grade" from 1 to 6 (1 being "very good") to each option; the average is calculated for each, and the option with the lowest average wins.
I have seeded the page with proposals which I remember from past discussions, please add your own where appropriate. My current favorite: 20 bytes + stub flagging.
Regards,
Erik
Erik Moeller wrote:
The voting system used is average voting, meaning you can assign a "grade" from 1 to 6 (1 being "very good") to each option; the average is calculated for each, and the option with the lowest average wins.
Assuming, of course, that we agree to abide by the vote results (keeping the same method of voting).
-- Toby
Erik Moeller wrote:
The voting system used is average voting, meaning you can assign a "grade" from 1 to 6 (1 being "very good") to each option; the average is calculated for each, and the option with the lowest average wins.
This is backwards. Where someone thinks so poorly of an option as not to vote they effectively give that option a zero vote. To work effectively it would require that a person who chooses to vote MUST vote on ALL options provided. It would be better if 6 were for very good, and the highest total score (or average?) wins.
Eclecticology
Erik Moeller wrote:
The voting system used is average voting, meaning you can assign a "grade" from 1 to 6 (1 being "very good") to each option; the average is calculated for each, and the option with the lowest average wins.
This is backwards. Where someone thinks so poorly of an option as not to vote they effectively give that option a zero vote.
No. Example:
Option: Only articles that contain the word "Foo" should be counted. 1 (very good): FooMaster 2: 3: 4: 5: KungFoo 6 (very bad): Eloquence
The resulting score (1+5+6) / 3: 4
Those who do not vote neither improve nor reduce the score.
Regards,
Erik
From: "Erik Moeller" erik_moeller@gmx.de
Option: Only articles that contain the word "Foo" should be counted. 1 (very good): FooMaster[...] 5: KungFoo
Objection! The assortium of world language wikipedias object on the grounds that the orthography of "Foo" proves to be too anglo-centric.
A more international spelling would need to be accepted into the vote.
A resolution calling for the immediate dismissal of "Foo" and a motion for re-spelling as "Fu" is now on the floor.
"FuBar" would thus be more in tune with "Fu Man Chu".
Amicomicalmente ;-) Jay B.
Feaux?
-----Original Message----- From: wikipedia-l-admin@wikipedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-admin@wikipedia.org]On Behalf Of Jay Bowks Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 16:29 To: wikipedia-l@wikipedia.org Subject: [Wikipedia-l] Article count reFoorm
From: "Erik Moeller" erik_moeller@gmx.de
Option: Only articles that contain the word "Foo" should be counted. 1 (very good): FooMaster[...] 5: KungFoo
Objection! The assortium of world language wikipedias object on the grounds that the orthography of "Foo" proves to be too anglo-centric.
A more international spelling would need to be accepted into the vote.
A resolution calling for the immediate dismissal of "Foo" and a motion for re-spelling as "Fu" is now on the floor.
"FuBar" would thus be more in tune with "Fu Man Chu".
Amicomicalmente ;-) Jay B.
_______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@wikipedia.org http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Hi,
Other French dialects might spell it "Fou" (mad) or "Faux" (wrong) ... ;o)
Yann
Le Jeudi 13 Mars 2003 04:04, Sean Barrett a écrit :
Feaux?
From: "Erik Moeller" erik_moeller@gmx.de
Option: Only articles that contain the word "Foo" should be counted. 1 (very good): FooMaster[...] 5: KungFoo
Objection! The assortium of world language wikipedias object on the grounds that the orthography of "Foo" proves to be too anglo-centric.
A more international spelling would need to be accepted into the vote.
A resolution calling for the immediate dismissal of "Foo" and a motion for re-spelling as "Fu" is now on the floor.
"FuBar" would thus be more in tune with "Fu Man Chu".
Imho, the best way of to find if an text is an article or not is just to see if there are a link inside. I think there are only few real articles that don't contain [[ ]].
Aoineko
Hi,
Other French dialects might spell it "Fou" (mad) or "Faux" (wrong) ... ;o)
Yann
Le Jeudi 13 Mars 2003 04:04, Sean Barrett a écrit :
Feaux?
From: "Erik Moeller" erik_moeller@gmx.de
Option: Only articles that contain the word "Foo" should be counted. 1 (very good): FooMaster[...] 5: KungFoo
Objection! The assortium of world language wikipedias object on the grounds that the orthography of "Foo" proves to be too anglo-centric.
A more international spelling would need to be accepted into the vote.
A resolution calling for the immediate dismissal of "Foo" and a motion for re-spelling as "Fu" is now on the floor.
"FuBar" would thus be more in tune with "Fu Man Chu".
-- http://www.forget-me.net Alternatives sur le Net http://keys.indymedia.org/showkey.py?key=0A34CBDA gpg --keyserver keys.indymedia.org --recv-key 0A34CBDA _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@wikipedia.org http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
From: "Ray Saintonge" saintonge@telus.net
Other French dialects might spell it "Fou" (mad) or "Faux" (wrong) ...
;o)
For the benefit of those who aren't aware, this is "mad" in the British rather than the American sense. :-)
--- Jay Bowks jjbowks@adam.cheshire.net wrote:
From: "Erik Moeller" erik_moeller@gmx.de
Option: Only articles that contain the word "Foo"
should be counted.
1 (very good): FooMaster[...] 5: KungFoo
Objection! The assortium of world language wikipedias object on the grounds that the orthography of "Foo" proves to be too anglo-centric.
A more international spelling would need to be accepted into the vote.
A resolution calling for the immediate dismissal of "Foo" and a motion for re-spelling as "Fu" is now on the floor.
"FuBar" would thus be more in tune with "Fu Man Chu".
Amicomicalmente ;-) Jay B.
btw, what does "foo" mean ?
__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online http://webhosting.yahoo.com
|From: Anthere anthere6@yahoo.com |Sender: wikipedia-l-admin@wikipedia.org |Reply-To: wikipedia-l@wikipedia.org |Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 12:41:57 -0800 (PST) | | |--- Jay Bowks jjbowks@adam.cheshire.net wrote: |> From: "Erik Moeller" erik_moeller@gmx.de |> > Option: Only articles that contain the word "Foo" |> should be counted. |> > 1 (very good): FooMaster[...] |> > 5: KungFoo |> |> Objection! The assortium of world |> language wikipedias object on the |> grounds that the orthography of |> "Foo" proves to be too anglo-centric. |> |> A more international spelling would |> need to be accepted into the vote. |> |> A resolution calling for the immediate |> dismissal of "Foo" and a motion for |> re-spelling as "Fu" is now on the floor. |> |> "FuBar" would thus be more in tune |> with "Fu Man Chu". |> |> Amicomicalmente ;-) |> Jay B. | |btw, what does "foo" mean ? |
You can find it all at
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foo
Tom Parmenter Ortolan88
|__________________________________________________ |Do you Yahoo!? |Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online |http://webhosting.yahoo.com |_______________________________________________ |Wikipedia-l mailing list |Wikipedia-l@wikipedia.org |http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l |
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org