Article Rating

[atteSmythe]

Not sure I like it. It's a wiki - If you don't like an article, fix it or at least drop a comment. I'm assuming that the rating doesn't get wiped as the page is edited.

[Duwis]

Not sure I like it. It's a wiki - If you don't like an article, fix it or at least drop a comment. I'm assuming that the rating doesn't get wiped as the page is edited.

We're testing out the rating system as a way to promote and bubble up articles the community find useful to the homepage and perhaps other places. The new "Most Popular" section under "Game Content" on the homepage uses the ratings to populate its list (with raw page views picking up the slack until people start rating stuff).

On normal page edits, we don't have it wipe the rating; we haven't decided if we will wipe ratings when we refresh the Lorebook with each game content update. We'll see how the community responds to the feature and go from there.

[1Noldor2RuleThemAll]

Collaborative filtering is yummy.

[atteSmythe]

Aw, sorry about your panda.

I figured it was being weighed into the most popular list. It just...strikes a nerve when I see comments on the forums that someone checked a page, saw it was wrong/bad, left it that way, but felt compelled to post that they knew it was wrong. I hope this isn't a way of codifying that.

Personally, I suspect I'll never hit anything below four stars. Clicking a bad rating button on an editable page is an admission of sloth.

(Aside: Love the new front portal, though, even if it's completely locked down. The old one was...inefficient.)

[Duwis]

(Aside: Love the new front portal, though, even if it's completely locked down. The old one was...inefficient.)

Yours is the exact opposite response we received when we did the same change to the DDO Compendium.

[Fredelas]

It might be helpful if you would explain exactly which portions of content these ratings are meant to apply to. Do they apply only to the "Player Entry" portions? Do they apply to the "Official Game Entry" parts, too? I've noticed the rings appear at the end of the "Player Entry" sections, even when those sections are empty or don't exist.

And what exactly does this "rings" scale represent? Do they represent my opinion of the accuracy of the "Official Game Entry"? Do they mean I think the "Player Entry" portion has a pretty picture? Do I give an article "1 ring" if it has a broken interactive map? Do I give it "4 out of 5 rings" if a quest page gave me the right information to complete the quest, but also spoiled it for me a little bit?

This system in its current implementation is way too vague to provide any meaningful feedback on a group scale, because everyone may be rating different aspects of the article, which may rightly deserve different ratings.

If you're looking at this like a popularity contest, there's already a "Most Viewed Pages" category, isn't there?

Edit: If you use the ratings system for ANYTHING, it shouldn't be for identifying articles to feature on the front page. That's what editorial teams are for. Instead, you should be using this system to find articles with the LOWEST ratings to flag them as needing review/repair/revision/removal.

[aleczander]

Yours is the exact opposite response we received when we did the same change to the DDO Compendium.

Maybe, but I will say again I love the new homepage of the lorebook. Very nice!

[Duwis]

It might be helpful if you would explain exactly which portions of content these ratings are meant to apply to. Do they apply only to the "Player Entry" portions? Do they apply to the "Official Game Entry" parts, too? I've noticed the rings appear at the end of the "Player Entry" sections, even when those sections are empty or don't exist.

When you rate an article, it applies to the entire page, official and player content, as it stands at that moment. Yes, there are flaws in this concept given the nature of wikis, but it is something we are experimenting with and seeing what the LotRO community makes of it.

And what exactly does this "rings" scale represent? Do they represent my opinion of the accuracy of the "Official Game Entry"? Do they mean I think the "Player Entry" portion has a pretty picture? Do I give an article "1 ring" if it has a broken interactive map? Do I give it "4 out of 5 rings" if a quest page gave me the right information to complete the quest, but also spoiled it for me a little bit?

Ratings are subjective; rate the article based on whatever criteria you deem important to you. We simply provide a numeric reference for you to use; 1 = d'oh, 5 = mmm... forbidden doughnut...

This system in its current implementation is way too vague to provide any meaningful feedback on a group scale, because everyone may be rating different aspects of the article, which may rightly deserve different ratings.

Again, ratings are subjective. Someone can rate an article high because they are new to a class, and it provided at least one helpful piece of information. Another can rate the same article low because it is of no use to them as a veteran player. Both are valid.

If you're looking at this like a popularity contest, there's already a "Most Viewed Pages" category, isn't there?

"Most Viewed" does not necessarily equate to best/worst of breed in the eyes of the community

Edit: If you use the ratings system for ANYTHING, it shouldn't be for identifying articles to feature on the front page. That's what editorial teams are for. Instead, you should be using this system to find articles with the LOWEST ratings to flag them as needing review/repair/revision/removal.

We can certainly use it for that purpose also.

[Fredelas]

Would it be possible to set up a Special: page with a script to search for articles by count of ratings and average ratings? (I pick these summary statistics because they seem to be already pre-computed and stored each time an article gets rated. Slap an index on those two columns and it should perform reliably well.)

For example:

Find articles that have been rated at least [____] but not more than [____] times, and whose average rating is between [____] and [____] rings.

A sortable paged list could be returned. This might help editors find articles which need some special attention, either good or bad.

I'm still generally opposed to this ratings idea, as it seems to remove some of the incentive for individual players to edit articles and make them all worthy of 5 rings.

Also, it doesn't seem possible to rate articles under the Lore: namespace. Is this intentional?

[Duwis]

Would it be possible to set up a Special: page with a script to search for articles by count of ratings and average ratings?

We'll look into it and see if we can get this in at some point.

Also, it doesn't seem possible to rate articles under the Lore: namespace. Is this intentional?

Yes.