On Dec 19, 2007 5:11 PM, draicone@gmail.com <draicone@gmail.com> wrote:

On Dec 20, 2007 10:07 AM, 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.

Well, we don't really want the top articles, a broad range to see how
the system behaves with different levels of quality is important, but
we could certainly take the top 10,000 and put in another 10,000 at
random. At the end of the day, this is just a demo, and even 100
articles will do -- nobody on this list is going to read through the
whole 40K. If anyone

@Gregory: Could you post some of those cases to the list so that they
can be imported manually whenever Luca is available?

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