On 03/10/05, Jei jei@cc.hut.fi wrote:
This "average user" peer review could be better directed and generate more feedback and improvements if the articles were instead randomly chosen from the new stock. The probability that the random visitor would contribute to them would be greater and the average "image" we give, would reflect the actual truth of what an average wikipedia contribution has to offer. A dip in our image perhaps, but also a rapid rise in contributions?
We have this, sort of - Did You Know on the mainpage. It's a short exposure - only maybe six hours - and it's not as well known as it might be, but it gets interesting short-but-decent articles out onto the main page for traffic.
There are limitations to this - it will only take articles of a minimum standard, though not a well defined one ("readable, not too short"), and it only uses new articles... but it does do it.
-- - Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk