Misplaced Pages

Talk:Reliability of : Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 05:09, 3 November 2023 editFabrickator (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users10,822 edits →Relevance of third sentence: risk of ongoing decline in quality of WP← Previous edit Revision as of 23:21, 3 November 2023 edit undo2603:8001:1:9:57c1:18f3:8ec8:912a (talk)No edit summaryTag: RevertedNext edit →
Line 54: Line 54:
| org = '']'' | org = '']''
| url = https://www.csmonitor.com/Technology/2018/1011/Why-does-Misplaced Pages-mostly-work | url = https://www.csmonitor.com/Technology/2018/1011/Why-does-Misplaced Pages-mostly-work
| date = October 11, 2018 | date = October 11, 2015
| quote = | quote =
| archiveurl = | archival =
| archivedate = | archive date =
| accessdate = | access date =
}} }}
{{archives|search=yes}} {{archives|search=yes}}
Line 64: Line 64:
== Christine Lagarde and Jimbo Wales == == Christine Lagarde and Jimbo Wales ==


Would something about ] qualify for addition, maybe to the "false biographical information" section? The fact that Jimbo Wales is involved seems to make this incident notable. ] (]) 06:38, 30 September 2023 (UTC) Would something about ] qualify for addition, maybe to the "false biographical information" section? The fact that Jimbo Wales is involved seems to make this incident notable. ] (]) 06:38, 30 September 2023 (UTC)


:For the purposes of inclusion in Misplaced Pages an incident is considered notable if it has ] in ]. Is there such coverage? A discussion on a talk page on Misplaced Pages does not qualify. —⁠] (]) 16:23, 30 September 2023 (UTC) : For the purposes of inclusion in Misplaced Pages an incident is considered notable if it has ] in ]. Is there such coverage? A discussion on a talk page on Misplaced Pages does not qualify. —⁠] (]) 16:23, 30 September 2023 (UTC)


== Misplaced Pages ... credability == == Misplaced Pages ... credibility ==


Co found says that it has become a left leaning propaganda machine. ] (]) 01:15, 19 October 2023 (UTC Co-founded says that it has become a left-leaning propaganda machine. ] (]) 01:15, 19 October 2023 (UTC


== Relevance of third sentence == == Relevance of third sentence ==


I've tagged the third sentence of the lead as it is unclear to me how the sources connect the sentence to the topic of the article: I've tagged the third sentence of the lead as it is unclear to me how the sources connect the sentence to the topic of the article:
:This editing model is highly concentrated, as 77% of all articles are written by ], a majority of whom ].<ref>{{Cite web|last=Oberhaus|first=Daniel|date=November 7, 2017|title=Nearly All of Misplaced Pages Is Written By Just 1 Percent of Its Editors|url=https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/7x47bb/wikipedia-editors-elite-diversity-foundation|access-date=June 20, 2020|website=Vice|language=en|archive-date=June 18, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200618105847/https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/7x47bb/wikipedia-editors-elite-diversity-foundation|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|last=Mandiberg|first=Michael|date=February 23, 2019|title=Mapping Misplaced Pages|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2020/02/where-wikipedias-editors-are-where-they-arent-and-why/605023/|access-date=February 23, 2019|website=The Atlantic|language=en-US|archive-date=February 23, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200223193330/https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2020/02/where-wikipedias-editors-are-where-they-arent-and-why/605023/|url-status=live}}</ref>{{Relevance inline|paragraph}} : This editing model is highly concentrated, as 77% of all articles are written by ], a majority of whom ].<ref>{{Cite web|last=Oberhaus|first=Daniel|date=November 7, 2017|title=Nearly All of Misplaced Pages Is Written By Just 1 Percent of Its Editors|url=https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/7x47bb/wikipedia-editors-elite-diversity-foundation|access-date=June 20, 2020|website=Vice|language=en|archive-date=June 18, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200618105847/https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/7x47bb/wikipedia-editors-elite-diversity-foundation|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|last=Mandiberg|first=Michael|date=February 23, 2019|title=Mapping Misplaced Pages|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2020/02/where-wikipedias-editors-are-where-they-arent-and-why/605023/|access-date=February 23, 2019|website=The Atlantic|language=en-US|archive-date=February 23, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200223193330/https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2020/02/where-wikipedias-editors-are-where-they-arent-and-why/605023/|url-status=live}}</ref>{{Relevance inline|paragraph}}
What does "77% of all articles are written by 1% of its editors" have to do with the reliability of Misplaced Pages? By the way, this statement is prominent in the lead but does not exist at all in the body. ] (] <nowiki>&#124;</nowiki> ]) 01:45, 3 November 2023 (UTC) ] (] <nowiki>&#124;</nowiki> ]) 01:45, 3 November 2023 (UTC) What does "77% of all articles are written by 1% of its editors" have to do with the reliability of Misplaced Pages? By the way, this statement is prominent in the lead but does not exist at all in the body. ] (] <nowiki>&#124;</nowiki> ]) 01:45, 3 November 2023 (UTC) ] (] <nowiki>&#124;</nowiki> ]) 01:45, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
:I suggest that we are supposed to make the inference that a large portion of the content is produced by experienced editors who are committed to adhering to ] and the presumed quality this provides. It's been at least 5 years since they came up with that number, and the extent to which this measurement (based on number of edits) is meaningful is unclear. This overlooks the fact that Misplaced Pages content is dynamic, with the implication that articles can be subsequently altered by editors who are less committed to maintaining its quality, notwithstanding all the implied claims that there are hordes of people to correct any erroneous content. Furthermore, to the extent that WP has a reputation of accuracy, that makes it a more attractive target for those who would benefit by maliciously altering the content. : I suggest that we are supposed to make the inference that a large portion of the content is produced by experienced editors who are committed to adhering to ] and the presumed quality this provides. It's been at least 5 years since they came up with that number, and the extent to which this measurement (based on the number of edits) is meaningful is unclear. This overlooks the fact that Misplaced Pages content is dynamic, with the implication that articles can be subsequently altered by editors who are less committed to maintaining their quality, notwithstanding all the implied claims that there are hordes of people to correct any erroneous content. Furthermore, to the extent that WP has a reputation of accuracy, makes it a more attractive target for those who would benefit by maliciously altering the content.
:In effect, even without any malicious editors, I feel that there's a "reversion to the mean" because the average edit is done by less competent editors than those who worked on improving the articles earlier on in the history of WP. Oh, well! ] (]) 05:09, 3 November 2023 (UTC) : In effect, even without any malicious editors, I feel that there's a "reversion to the mean" because the average edit is done by less competent editors than those who worked on improving the articles earlier on in the history of WP. Oh, well! ] (]) 05:09, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
{{Reflist-talk}} {{Reflist-talk}}

Revision as of 23:21, 3 November 2023

A summary of this article appears in Misplaced Pages.
WikiProject iconMisplaced Pages B‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Misplaced Pages, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's encyclopedic coverage of itself. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. Please remember to avoid self-references and maintain a neutral point of view, even on topics relating to Misplaced Pages.WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject WikipediaWikipedia
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

To-do list for Reliability of Misplaced Pages: edit · history · watch · refresh · Updated 2019-10-25


Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
Priority 4
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
Text has been copied to or from this article; see the list below. The source pages now serve to provide attribution for the content in the destination pages and must not be deleted as long as the copies exist. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see the history links below.
This is not the page to discuss whether a source in an article is reliable. If you want to do that, go to WP:RSN or the talk page of the article in question.

Media mentionThis topic has been mentioned by a media organization:
Archiving icon
Archives
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3
Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6

This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

Christine Lagarde and Jimbo Wales

Would something about Talk: Christine Lagarde#BLP issue qualify for addition, maybe to the "false biographical information" section? The fact that Jimbo Wales is involved seems to make this incident notable. Renerpho (talk) 06:38, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

For the purposes of inclusion in Misplaced Pages an incident is considered notable if it has significant coverage in reliable sources. Is there such coverage? A discussion on a talk page on Misplaced Pages does not qualify. —⁠andrybak (talk) 16:23, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages ... credibility

Co-founded says that it has become a left-leaning propaganda machine. Jacob805 (talk) 01:15, 19 October 2023 (UTC

Relevance of third sentence

I've tagged the third sentence of the lead as it is unclear to me how the sources connect the sentence to the topic of the article:

This editing model is highly concentrated, as 77% of all articles are written by 1% of its editors, a majority of whom have chosen to remain anonymous.

What does "77% of all articles are written by 1% of its editors" have to do with the reliability of Misplaced Pages? By the way, this statement is prominent in the lead but does not exist at all in the body. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 01:45, 3 November 2023 (UTC) Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 01:45, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

I suggest that we are supposed to make the inference that a large portion of the content is produced by experienced editors who are committed to adhering to WP: Policy and the presumed quality this provides. It's been at least 5 years since they came up with that number, and the extent to which this measurement (based on the number of edits) is meaningful is unclear. This overlooks the fact that Misplaced Pages content is dynamic, with the implication that articles can be subsequently altered by editors who are less committed to maintaining their quality, notwithstanding all the implied claims that there are hordes of people to correct any erroneous content. Furthermore, to the extent that WP has a reputation of accuracy, makes it a more attractive target for those who would benefit by maliciously altering the content.
In effect, even without any malicious editors, I feel that there's a "reversion to the mean" because the average edit is done by less competent editors than those who worked on improving the articles earlier on in the history of WP. Oh, well! Fabrickator (talk) 05:09, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

References

  1. Oberhaus, Daniel (November 7, 2017). "Nearly All of Misplaced Pages Is Written By Just 1 Percent of Its Editors". Vice. Archived from the original on June 18, 2020. Retrieved June 20, 2020.
  2. Mandiberg, Michael (February 23, 2019). "Mapping Misplaced Pages". The Atlantic. Archived from the original on February 23, 2020. Retrieved February 23, 2019.
Categories: