[WikiEN-l] A quick references survey

Mon Jan 30 23:06:23 UTC 2006

>
> Conclusions:
> None yet, really, since the methodology isn't very solid and the
> sample set is small. But notably: More than half the articles were
> stubs. Hardly any articles had any real "references". Most of the
> external links were band websites, company websites etc. Of the few
> refernces, one was blatantly false and a few were "bad". So it's
> probably a little early to be claiming that all material added to
> Wikipedia MUST be sourced or it will be removed. Because based on
> this, only around 15% of Wikipedia would survive. (Which is more than
> I would have predicted).
>
>
> Any suggestions for improved methodology? It might be nice to harness
> the wikipedia population to collect some more general article quality
> metrics...
>
> Steve

I think we can have quite a simply solution to this. Do the same as we did
to the images. Stuff which isn't cited within a week, can be speedy deleted
like we do with images now. Just make sure it only applies to articles
created after date X.

Mgm