-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Unimportant articles in Football selection welcome page #15
Comments
Yes, we should somehow have a topic specific score |
That would probably be the easy way out but if that rating is based on enwp then it would negatively impact other languages (e.g. a German or Spanish team might get low ranking while it would be high on its native wiki). Can't we simply say that low-ranking articles should be excluded from the landing page/Top100? |
Scores are wiki specific. We produce now selections sorted by scores. The solution you propose does not really fit to the current architecture as we have no way to directly control what is on the welcome page, this is just the first 100 elements of the selection. To me this bug is just the symptom that the project article list is sorted on generic criterias whereas the project centric evaluation should be prominent. |
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be now be reviewed manually. Thank you for your contributions. |
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be now be reviewed manually. Thank you for your contributions. |
Looks a lot (yet different) like #16 and in the end looks mostly solved by now. |
No, no, the real solution is not implemented. |
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be now be reviewed manually. Thank you for your contributions. |
The latest Football selection has a couple of false positives on the landing page (ie. top 100 articles):
Obviously these may have some relationship to football but probably aren't great at it (or worth making it to the top 100).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: