Grants:IdeaLab/From AfC to DYK
Project idea edit
What Wikimedia project(s) and specific areas will you be evaluating? edit
Is this project measuring a specific space on a project (e.g. deletion discussions), or the project as a whole?
English Wikipedia, specifically the Did You Know section and Articles for Creation
Describe your idea. How might it be implemented? edit
From the set of drafts that have passed AfC or a sufficiently large random sample thereof, check to see if seven days after publication they could have qualified for DYK. This, hopefully, will be straightforward: AfC articles are tagged as such on their talk pages, passing AfC usually means passing DYK requirement #4, and perhaps a tool/bot/script similar to the existing DYK check tool can be used to evaluate DYK req #2. For the sake of simplicity, we may decide it safe to assume DYK req #5 was satisfied and infer DYK req #3 from presence of inline citations. From the pool of articles that could have, count how many got nominated (that is, how many have the relevant tag on their talk pages).
Are there experienced Wikimedians who can help implement this project? edit
If applicable, please list groups or usernames of individuals who you can work with on this project, and what kind of work they will do.
If this project is successful, we will have a number that answers the question. In addition to knowing how many drafts that pass AfC eventually reach DYK level, we will also know how many of those DYK-level articles do get nominated. A supplementary metric of success is whether this spawns more questions about DYK-qualifying articles and further research.
How would your measurement idea help your community make better decisions? edit
After you are finished measuring or evaluating your Wikimedia project, how do you expect that information to be used to benefit the project?
The aims of DYK align closely with the aims of this campaign: "encourage" encourages collaboration, that and "acknowledge" address editor retention, and arguably, all five have to do with high quality content creation. DYK, then, has the potential to increase our community health, especially considering it is designed to have a relatively low barrier to entry. Thus, if we are already nominating DYK to its maximum potential, it makes no sense to invest more resources in it. On the other hand, if the data (and hopefully, subsequent broader or related measurements) find that we can still make better use, we should! Since this particular idea involves AfC, perhaps adding a link to DYK to AfC acceptance notices, cooperation between DYK and AfC volunteers if people working in DYK and AfC don't have much overlap.
Do you think you can implement this idea? What support do you need? edit
Do you need people with specific skills to complete this idea? Are there any financial needs for this project? If you can’t implement this project, can you scale down your project so it is doable?
I don't have much expertise in research, so someone with experience in that to check scope as well as presentation of results would be helpful. Modifying DYK check, checking for inline citations, and building a bot/script also requires technical knowledge beyond what I can do.
Get Involved edit
About the idea creator edit
Expand your idea edit
Would a grant from the Wikimedia Foundation help make your idea happen? You can expand this idea into a grant proposal.
No funding needed? edit
Does your idea not require funding, but you're not sure about what to do next? Not sure how to start a proposal on your local project that needs consensus? Contact Chris Schilling on-wiki at I JethroBT (WMF) (talk · contribs) or via e-mail at cschilling wikimedia.org for help!