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