On 03/10/05, Jei <jei(a)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(a)dunelm.org.uk