[Wikimedia-l] AFT5: what practical benefits has it had?

[Federico Leva (Nemo)]

Dario Taraborelli, 12/10/2012 15:41:
> On Oct 12, 2012, at 2:11, "Federico Leva (Nemo)" <nemowiki at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> we have some preliminary usage data coming from the FeedbackPage: http://toolserver.org/~dartar/fp/
>> Graphs are empty for me there, is it just me?
>
> We have a temporary hardware issue affecting the slave DB from which this data is pulled. Ops is on it and I hope to have it back soon.

Thank you for enabling it again. I had read about the blind tests in 
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Article_feedback/Quality_assessment> 
before but I see some major changes in the graphs, which are a bit hard 
to understand.
1) In "Daily moderation actions (percentage)" there's a huge spike of 
helpful/unhelpful after C (July), did those flags even exist before? Or 
did helpfulness increase after wider usage according to the finding «the 
average page receives higher quality feedback than pages picked for 
their popularity/controversial topic»? (There's no change between 5 and 
10 % though.)
2) "Unique daily articles with feedback moderated" shows a spike and 
then a stabilization, but I don't know what the graphs actually is 
about. For instance, can feedback be moderated per article ("feedback 
semi/full protection" or so) or only per item, etc. Do you know if 
moderation happens on the same articles and if stricter moderation 
increases helpfulness of feedback also on non-moderated articles?

Nemo