Is there anyone that has done any research on how the number of visitors relates to the article quality? I believe it is related somehow but I'm not sure how it can be modeled. It works by counting the visitors that reads a particular segment of the article, and then will accept the particular segment as correct when a sufficient number of visitors has been visiting. It can work together with a system for writer grading, were this system will change the grade from whatever the writer has.
Compared to this a "stable versions" is like having a visitor with ultimate power to mark the revision as good. This system does not give the visitors such ultimate power, and in fact will not give give them more than a small fraction of the power necessary to claim the revision is free of vandalism. Combined I guess it is possible to make a system that will be better than anyone of them alone.
Any real vandalism will most likely never be marked as good, because the limit can be set so high that it will be found by someone long before it is marked as "patrolled", and then most likely nothing or very little of the revision will survive so the revision itself will never be marked as patrolled. If a known good writer contributes a revision, then it will get a flying start and it will need few visitors ("anonymous patrollers") before it is marked as "good". If the writer is unknown the revision will need a lot of visitors before it is marked as good.
Even very seldom read articles have several visitors each week, and through a year this will add up to a considerable amount of visitors.
John
You can check out Priedhorsky's work at http://www.cs.umn.edu/~reid/papers/group282-priedhorsky.pdf. They synthesize page view data and create a model of value and damage based on it. They also make that page view data available so other people can play with it if they want.
Wilkinson's work might also be relevant: http://ws2007.wikisym.org/space/WilkinsonHubermanPaper. I think that they use page view data in order to calculate a page-rank of sorts for each article.
Travis
John Erling Blad wrote:
Is there anyone that has done any research on how the number of visitors relates to the article quality? I believe it is related somehow but I'm not sure how it can be modeled. It works by counting the visitors that reads a particular segment of the article, and then will accept the particular segment as correct when a sufficient number of visitors has been visiting. It can work together with a system for writer grading, were this system will change the grade from whatever the writer has.
Compared to this a "stable versions" is like having a visitor with ultimate power to mark the revision as good. This system does not give the visitors such ultimate power, and in fact will not give give them more than a small fraction of the power necessary to claim the revision is free of vandalism. Combined I guess it is possible to make a system that will be better than anyone of them alone.
Any real vandalism will most likely never be marked as good, because the limit can be set so high that it will be found by someone long before it is marked as "patrolled", and then most likely nothing or very little of the revision will survive so the revision itself will never be marked as patrolled. If a known good writer contributes a revision, then it will get a flying start and it will need few visitors ("anonymous patrollers") before it is marked as "good". If the writer is unknown the revision will need a lot of visitors before it is marked as good.
Even very seldom read articles have several visitors each week, and through a year this will add up to a considerable amount of visitors.
John
Wikiquality-l mailing list Wikiquality-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiquality-l
John Erling Blad wrote:
It works by counting the visitors that reads a particular segment of the article, and then will accept the particular segment as correct when a sufficient number of visitors has been visiting.
How do you count visitors to segments? There are now available statistics for visitors to articles, but that doesn't go down to segment level. It is also much harder to determine edits on the segment level, than to just count edits per article. Is it really worth the extra effort?
If such a thing would be done, then I guess some extra code would be necessary. It is not necessary to check which part of an article someone has visited, as a plain count of visits to the overall article would be a viable simplification. I think such a simplification is possible, but it will increase the number of necessary visits. Especially before edits on the last part of a large article can be flagged as clean, or even correct.
Probably there has to be made some code to make a model describing which parts of an article is read by a visitor, given the size of the article.
John
Lars Aronsson skrev:
John Erling Blad wrote:
It works by counting the visitors that reads a particular segment of the article, and then will accept the particular segment as correct when a sufficient number of visitors has been visiting.
How do you count visitors to segments? There are now available statistics for visitors to articles, but that doesn't go down to segment level. It is also much harder to determine edits on the segment level, than to just count edits per article. Is it really worth the extra effort?
wikiquality-l@lists.wikimedia.org