No edit summary |
(not stub) |
||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
** '''Rating tools''': As trialed on Wikipedia: "article feedback tool" & "new-editor feedback dashboard". {{priority}} - ''2nd level priority, after the incubator, community growth and communication''. | ** '''Rating tools''': As trialed on Wikipedia: "article feedback tool" & "new-editor feedback dashboard". {{priority}} - ''2nd level priority, after the incubator, community growth and communication''. | ||
* '''Content moderation''': Consider the use of "Pending changes" as trialed on Wikipedia. (For selective use if at all, as it adds work. It also reduces the editor's gratification that they normally get from seeing their changes go immediately live.) | * '''Content moderation''': Consider the use of "Pending changes" as trialed on Wikipedia. (For selective use if at all, as it adds work. It also reduces the editor's gratification that they normally get from seeing their changes go immediately live.) | ||
* '''Quality algorithm''': Use an algorithm to make a shortlist of quality pages, along the lines described in the research paper [https://kaigi.org/jsai/webprogram/2012/pdf/697.pdf Thai Wikipedia Quality Measurement using Fuzzy Logic]. These can then be checked before being featured (e.g. displayed on homepage). | * '''Quality algorithm''': Use an algorithm to make a shortlist of quality pages, along the lines described in the research paper [https://kaigi.org/jsai/webprogram/2012/pdf/697.pdf Thai Wikipedia Quality Measurement using Fuzzy Logic]. These can then be checked before being featured (e.g. displayed on homepage). | ||
== See also == | == See also == | ||
Revision as of 01:15, 25 April 2013
How do we maintain, improve and provide assurance of the quality of Appropedia articles? We need to create more articles of good or excellent quality, and identify those articles, to highlight them and ensure they are found (and used) by visitors.
A Template:Priority tag identifies approaches that are suggested to be more effective and achievable in the near term but it's open to discussion.
Community
- Communication: Encourage editors and reviewers to visit more often - i.e. strengthen the Appropedia community and feeling of participation; improve notifications, and communicate. Template:Priority
- Growth: (attract expert editors and reviewers through promoting service learning, and attract more editors in general - see [[A:Publicity) - with a strategy of networking and engaging media and social media.) Template:Priority
Processes
- Incubate: Encourage pages to be started using Appropedia:Incubator (or optionally in userspace.) Template:Priority
Programs
- Events and competitions:
- Error-fixing competitions?
- Error fixing bees - similar to "bug squashing bees" for open source software projects.
Tech development
- Review tools: Make it easier and more rewarding for people to flag errors and correct errors, and attract reviewers who do this. (What are the options to achieve this?)
- Rating tools: As trialed on Wikipedia: "article feedback tool" & "new-editor feedback dashboard". Template:Priority - 2nd level priority, after the incubator, community growth and communication.
- Content moderation: Consider the use of "Pending changes" as trialed on Wikipedia. (For selective use if at all, as it adds work. It also reduces the editor's gratification that they normally get from seeing their changes go immediately live.)
- Quality algorithm: Use an algorithm to make a shortlist of quality pages, along the lines described in the research paper Thai Wikipedia Quality Measurement using Fuzzy Logic. These can then be checked before being featured (e.g. displayed on homepage).