Nothing really related to the topic of my question. I guess this means there is nothing so far.

Thanks!

On 20 September 2014 11:25, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:

antonio roa, 20/09/2014 10:48:

...

I was wondering if there are any studies trying to measure the quality / trust of Wiktionary content

You can start with:

• https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Search/

Wiktionary_prefix:Research:Newsletter

• http://wikipapers.referata.com/wiki/Wiktionary

Please add any other relevant publication to wikipapers!

Nemo

---

Wiktionary-l mailing list Wiktionary-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiktionary-l

Can you please provide me with the exact link of the paper you are referring to? I read [1] and what they propose is an alignment between Wiktionary and OmegaWiki translations. Maybe I didn't formulate my question quite clear. I am interested about papers suggesting measures for the quality of the content available in Wiktionary, specially translations. The only related papers to this topic that I could found are doing a qualitative analysis from a lexicographical point of view.

Thanks.

[1] https://www.ukp.tu-darmstadt.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Group_UKP/publikatione...

On 20 September 2014 13:57, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:

antonio roa, 20/09/2014 11:29:

...

Nothing really related to the topic of my question. I guess this means there is nothing so far.

Err, there are actually some papers discussing how Wiktionary was useful for them to the purpose you described. Look better?

Nemo

---

Wiktionary-l mailing list Wiktionary-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiktionary-l