Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikidemia/Use of referencing and assessment: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Richard001 (talk | contribs) m Wording |
Richard001 (talk | contribs) Summary data |
||
Line 5:
Of the 50, 34 had no references (almost 70%). Of those 16 that did cite references, 10 were few or poor in quality, 4 were rated average, and only 2 were rated 'well referenced'. Regarding citations, 9 of 16 provided in text citations. Half of the articles were assessed.
The number of assessed articles is encouraging. The quality however, which was not recorded here, was generally low. Summary data on assessment throughout Wikipedia is available [[Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Index|here]]. The data on referencing is the most disappointing, with only a minority providing any references at all, and only half of them using in text citations. Additionally, most referenced articles had only one or two references, often of poor quality.
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.
| |||