Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikidemia/Use of referencing and assessment: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 04:47, 9 October 2007

Revision as of 22:57, 9 October 2007

Line 9:

How the number of assessed articles has changed and is changing is of interest. Similarly, changes in quality and current quality would also be worth researching. Use of references over time would be of interest as well. Changes in individual articles over time in terms of these qualities would provide another perspective.

Methods to get more people assessing articles, and, especially, citing sources is needed. Recently links have been added to the Wikipedia interface for those who are not signed in. Adding links to basic guideline and policy pages for relatively new members, such as how to use [[Wikipedia:Footnotes|footnotes]], may also be worth while. Effective communication with new editors, especially from more experienced Wikipedians, is also needneeded. Editors needhave to realize that references are not optional but a requirement for almost all articles. WikiProjects and similar groups should also set goals to improve article quality within their scope, and work towards achieving these. If Wikipedia is to be treated as even a semi-reliable source, its articles need to improve in quality. References are a key part of this.

This sample is only small, and not very representative. A random article does not represent the average article people work on or view, and thus the results will be poorer. A method for easily obtaining a sample of representative articles is needed for future research.