Brian J Mingus wrote:
o Note that featured articles are easy to predict. * *A* articles are /correlated/ with Number of references, PageRank, Number of external links, Number of images, Article age (page-id). o Note that A articles are extremely hard to predict. All of the above A predictors are weaker than all of the featured predictors. This class should be merged with another quality class.
I wonder if this is because most projects don't have a proper A-class grading scheme, and often editors will just give A-grade article to GA (or even pre-GA class article) without much thought.
I wonder if your results would be stronger if you limited the analysis to A-class articles of projects that have an A-class review process (MILHIST and...?).
* *G *articles are /correlated/ with Number of external links, Number of templates, Number of references, Automated Readability Index, Flesh-Kincaid Grade Level * *G* articles are /negatively correlated/ with Length of article HTML, Flesch Reading Ease, Smog Grading o Note that G articles are extremely hard to predict and should be merged with another quality class.
Interesting. I presume you mean Good Article (GA) class here. I wonder why those results are week - is it because Good Article reviewers standards vary much more widely than the Featured Article reviewers standards?