On Dec 19, 2007 4:07 PM, Brian <Brian.Mingus@colorado.edu> wrote:

I can provide a list of the top 40,000 articles rated by quality according to the wikipedia editorial team. A random sample is unlikely to be interesting, as greater than 70% of articles are stubs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Index

On Dec 19, 2007 5:05 PM, Luca de Alfaro < luca@soe.ucsc.edu> wrote:

Oh yes!
In fact, if you tell me which article titles you are interested in, I can run those through, and load them in a secondary demo we have.
I may get around to posting the results only in early January though, as the break is fast approaching.
Luca

On Dec 19, 2007 4:00 PM, draicone@gmail.com < draicone@gmail.com> wrote:

On Dec 20, 2007 9:10 AM, Luca de Alfaro <luca@soe.ucsc.edu> wrote:
> That's true. We had to truncate histories to make everything fit into a server.
> We are gaining experience in how to deal with Wikipedia information (terabytes of it),
> and we may be able to give a better demo in some time, with full histories, but.... we
> need to buy some storage first! :-)

Could you possibly take a random sample of 2% of articles and examine
the full histories of those? 40,000 articles is more than enough for a
dem, and we can rig the sample to include some articles of interest if
needed.

Akash

_______________________________________________
Wikiquality-l mailing list
Wikiquality-l@lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiquality-l