Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
_ The Wikipedia Annex _ Finding high-quality revisions
Posted by: thekohser
They have some real geniuses over there on the Foundation-l list, noodling over tough questions, yet coming up with such http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2011-December/070964.html:
QUOTE
Yao Ziyuan yaoziyuan at gmail.com
Mon Dec 19 22:38:46 UTC 2011
Hi Wikipedians,
I seem to have found a way to automatically judge which revision of a
Wikipedia article has the best quality.
It's very simple: look at that article's edit history and find out, within
a specified time range (e.g. the past 6 months), which revision remained
unchallenged for the longest time until the next revision occurred.
Of course there can be additional factors to refine this, such as also
considering each revision's author's reputation (Wikipedia has a reputation
system for Wikipedians), but I still feel the above idea is the simplest
and most elegant, just like the original PageRank idea is for Google.
Best Regards,
Ziyuan Yao
Mon Dec 19 22:38:46 UTC 2011
Hi Wikipedians,
I seem to have found a way to automatically judge which revision of a
Wikipedia article has the best quality.
It's very simple: look at that article's edit history and find out, within
a specified time range (e.g. the past 6 months), which revision remained
unchallenged for the longest time until the next revision occurred.
Of course there can be additional factors to refine this, such as also
considering each revision's author's reputation (Wikipedia has a reputation
system for Wikipedians), but I still feel the above idea is the simplest
and most elegant, just like the original PageRank idea is for Google.
Best Regards,
Ziyuan Yao
It's so simple and elegant, what could possibly be wrong?
Posted by: thekohser
Surprise! http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2011-December/070975.html thinks it's an idea that "warrants investigation"?
Posted by: Shalom
QUOTE(thekohser @ Tue 20th December 2011, 4:18pm) 
Surprise! http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2011-December/070975.html thinks it's an idea that "warrants investigation"?
The idea is moronic. It works mainly because vandalism is usually reverted quickly and doesn't last. On balance, I would look for the latest non-vandalism version in a given time period because articles usually (not always) improve with time.
Posted by: Cunningly Linguistic
I would thought the easiest way would be to check the edit history and see which one was done by Malleus.