[cc'ing to wikipedia-l]
Joseph Reagle (reagle(a)mit.edu) [050528 02:56]:
On Thursday 26 May 2005 08:41, David Gerard wrote:
> I particularly want to hear from academic
researchers interested in
> Wikipedia - you folk will LOVE this data. What things would you
> particularly like to see reader/editor ratings of?
At first blush, it would make sense to rate articles
with respect to the
criteria of what makes a good article as documented on:
Yeah. I went through the first of those and tried to write them as rateable
criteria. All improvements most welcomed.
So, it would be really interesting to see what are
the most popular
stub articles. (This to could be generated automatically from referrer, but
can also be used so as to find the most popular poorly rated articles once
we have that data.)
"Gather the data but don't do anything with it yet" is an idea that I think
will work very nicely *because* it separates layers properly. If we create
a pile of raw data, people will come up with *all sorts* of interesting
things to do with it. Then maybe we can go back and tweak what we collect.