Actually, you find that as certain types of articles rise to the level
of being featured (or just improve in general), they usually end up
having being rewritten almost in their entirety. Some of the
information added earlier may still be there, but the wording will
invariably have been changed. If there was a way to measure the
'content' of an article, not just the character strings, that would be
a better measure.
Also, what you will find when looking for editors who have text
strings that survive longest is that you will find those who are most
assiduous about keeping track of the articles on their watchlist. That
can be either ownership (bad) or stewardship of a well-done article
(good).
The assumption "Presumably anything that still remains is of
sufficient quality for whatever level the article is" has so much
wrong with it that I don't know where to start. It is quite common for
the final push for an article to be featured to involve different
editors to those that brought it to the current state. And that often
involves stepping back, taking a long hard look at the article and the
sources, and then ripping up large quantities of the article and
rewriting and rebalancing things.
Whether that is building on what went before, or not, I'm still not
entirely sure.
Carcharoth
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 5:32 PM, Ian Woollard <ian.woollard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
OTOH quantity has a quality all of its own. So far as
I know, there's no
good measure of how much text people have contributed that still remain in
the article.
It would be a really good idea to measure how many unique strings of
characters each editor has added to each article and in general. Presumably
anything that still remains is of sufficient quality for whatever level the
article is.
On 1 October 2011 16:52, Carcharoth <carcharothwp(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:46 PM, Bod Notbod
<bodnotbod(a)gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
I still think we could do with more rewards and
maybe this damned game
has given me an answer.
More editor stats.
I think what is needed is some way to measure quality objectively. It
may be that only quantity can be measured objectively, and that
quality can only be measured subjectively. But I'd support something
that moved the focus away from quantity towards quality.
Carcharoth
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
--
-Ian Woollard
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l