Talk:Trust metric
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Well, I looked at the "trust metrics" wiki, and I was unimpressed by the quality, and unable to figure out how to edit a page, so I just gave up.
Anyway, the solution for Wikipedia is to add a "Rate this change!" feature. Each change could be rated on a -3 to +3 scale.
-3 : This user should be banned.
-2 :
-1 : Change has some minor problems, but nothing serious.
0 : no opinion
1 : slight improvement (grammar fix, small factual error)
2 : big improvement
3 : major contribution, verified to be correct
Then, users who themselves collect many "highly rated changes" would be able to bestow such status on others. However, to prevent people from just falsely rating each other highly, you just have to make sure that someone can only have a high rating themselves after earning it from someone trustworthy.
The important thing is to start collecting the data. After that, it should be very easy to calculate who is trustworthy.
Also notice that a "no opinion" rating would still be useful. It would mean that someone inspected the change and found no egregious errors or sabotage.
- This page should really be used to discuss the article in the question. For the issue of trust metrics and networks in Wikipedia, see WP:TRUST. TheGrappler 18:25, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Proposed Wikipedia trust metric
Moved this to the talk page, as it might be interesting for wikipedians, but irrelevant and self-referential in the article:
- Levien also proposes a trust metric for Wikipedia to aid quality control and to minimize the effects of Wikipedia:Vandalism.
--Tgr 18:49, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Google Page Rank
Google page rank can be manipulated. Gordo 10:16, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- See references at Search engine optimisation --Gordo 10:20, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- In particular Googlebombs and Googlebombing: Teh Rules --Gordo 10:22, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
