Difference between revisions of "Evaluating Quality Control of Wikipedia's Feature Articles"
(Information about: Evaluating Quality Control of Wikipedia's Feature Articles) |
(+ wikilinks) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | '''Evaluating Quality Control of Wikipedia's Feature Articles''' - scientific work related to Wikipedia quality published in 2010, written by David Lindsey. | + | '''Evaluating Quality Control of Wikipedia's Feature Articles''' - scientific work related to [[Wikipedia quality]] published in 2010, written by [[David Lindsey]]. |
== Overview == | == Overview == | ||
| − | The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of | + | The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of [[Wikipedia]]’s internal quality control mechanism, the “featured article” process, which assesses articles against a stringent set of criteria. To this end, scholars were asked to evaluate the quality and accuracy of Wikipedia [[featured articles]] within their area of expertise. A total of 22 usable responses were collected from a variety of disciplines. Out of the Wikipedia articles assessed, only 12 of 22 were found to pass Wikipedia’s own featured article criteria, indicating that Wikipedia’s process is ineffective. This finding suggests both that Wikipedia must take steps to improve its featured article process and that scholars interested in studying Wikipedia should be careful not to naively believe its assertions of quality. |
Revision as of 19:53, 14 June 2019
Evaluating Quality Control of Wikipedia's Feature Articles - scientific work related to Wikipedia quality published in 2010, written by David Lindsey.
Overview
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of Wikipedia’s internal quality control mechanism, the “featured article” process, which assesses articles against a stringent set of criteria. To this end, scholars were asked to evaluate the quality and accuracy of Wikipedia featured articles within their area of expertise. A total of 22 usable responses were collected from a variety of disciplines. Out of the Wikipedia articles assessed, only 12 of 22 were found to pass Wikipedia’s own featured article criteria, indicating that Wikipedia’s process is ineffective. This finding suggests both that Wikipedia must take steps to improve its featured article process and that scholars interested in studying Wikipedia should be careful not to naively believe its assertions of quality.
