Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States Public Policy/Challenge

I propose as an exercise to cross evaluate a small sample of articles from everyone participating in the challenge. Not that I am an academic expert, but I do have the experience as a librarian in judging basic quality of published works across many fields. The basis of a method like this is some sort of inter-rater consistency. DGG ( talk ) 02:16, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I think this is something Amy wants to do (if not necessarily as part of a challenge). We certainly talked about it, and it might be useful more broadly too, to get a better understanding of how inconsistent the the standard rating system is. Regarding your criticism on the other page, there's also been some discussion of getting experts to rate articles and then comparing those ratings with Wikipedian ratings using the same system.--Sross (Public Policy) (talk) 14:24, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi DGG and Sage, I just finished the analysis plan for testing the article assessment metric, and I posted it on the outreach wiki. This plan is finished with articles randomly selected and distributed, so any criticism will probably have to be taken into account in the final summary. But I'm pretty confident that this analysis will produce some meaningful results. Study design is always more difficult that it sounds like it should be, and this little study was no exception. We need a total of 10 reviewers, I was hoping to get some Wikipedia experts and some policy experts. Sage, how should we recruit people who would like to be a part of this? I think we will send out the data collection spreadsheets with first set of articles at the beginning of August, and then the second set 2-3 weeks later. Hopefully the reviewers could get their results back within 3 days. ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 18:43, 15 July 2010 (UTC)