Can someone install ORES on the Welsh (cy) Wikipedia, please? I'm interested in the Article quality assessment tool. It would be much appreciated! Thanks! Llywelyn2000 (talk) 11:33, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Reply to "Installing ORES on cy-wiki"
Reply to "Wikipedia content sources are they estimated in ORES, for the task T141177"
Reply to "Is Ores service only applicable to wikimedia fundation wikis?"
Reply to "[Cross-post] Including new filter interface in ORES review tool"
Reply to "Suggestion - Separate page for reporting highly likely vandalism e.g. Special:RevisionReport"
Installing ORES on cy-wiki
Wikipedia content sources are they estimated in ORES, for the task T141177
I'm assigned to the task T141177: "Wikipedia main content losts sources because too reverts, try to preserve them".
Then I need to know if the estimation of Wikipedia main content sources are already take in account in ORES. Thanks in advance for your attention.
Is Ores service only applicable to wikimedia fundation wikis?
if so, I think the subject page should make it clear.
Good question. For now, yes. However, we interact with the wikis through MediaWiki APIs so in theory it would be possible to run on third-party wikis. Where it gets tricky is that you would probably have to run your own infrastructure.
Thanks, I'll take your advice and mention this in the article.
[Cross-post] Including new filter interface in ORES review tool
I made a post at mw:Topic:Tflhjj5x1numzg67 about including the new advanced filtering interface that the Collaboration Team is working on in the ORES beta feature. See the original post and add any discussion there.
Suggestion - Separate page for reporting highly likely vandalism e.g. Special:RevisionReport
The idea of using ORES for surfacing rated revisions in recent changes is reasonable. However, there is still excessive amounts of noise in the revisions, and recent changes is definitely has a lot of usability problems.
One option is to generate a report (e.g. Special:RevisionReport) that shows only the highest likely and and 100% content damage and vandalism, for example:
- Page blanking - there is rarely a need to blank a page, either it needs to be deleted or improved
- Huge amount of random characters - e.g. "asdasdASDZXczxc"
- Emoji: lots of emojis in an article
- Hoaxes: If it is even possible to detect that
- Repetitive text: The "buy viagra ... buy viagra" kind of thing
- Similar entries in multiple articles: Often vandals hit several articles adding nearly identical text
The idea is that people can simple focus on these, and clean them up gradually without looking into the whole recent changes. While there are improvements on the horizon for recent changes, it is still a tool attempting to fulfill too many use-cases and failing miserably at a lot of them.
Another idea, would be to flag potential bad actors. While this may be controversial for registered users, it might be perfect for IP addresses to identify if there is a particular pattern of behavior for an ip range.
There are no older topics