Disputatio Vicipaediae:Aestimatio
Your listed criteria are good. Obviously, rating our articles the same way en: does would cause problems, given that very few of them contain the level of detail en: demands, and that we are generally more concerned with latinitas than content! --Iustinus 17:37, 20 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
- <<Ahem>> Vicipaedia:Latinitas =] --Ioshus (disp) 17:41, 20 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, we are different. :-) This is why I thought we should have such a page and why I listed Latinitas very near to the top. And I like that you say we are generally more concerned with latinitas than content. I think so, too. This page is just a start. I think we need templates for every aspect where we do not have templates yet. Or maybe a template which combines these aspects. We should at least know what aspects are important for us. There might be even a level of latinitas which is worse than "maxcorrigenda" and where we want to say "that's too bad". Ioshus started a page Vicipaedia:Latinitas where we might discuss what levels of latinitas we want to distinguish and how we want to deal with the really bad articles. --Rolandus 21:51, 20 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps we could have Latinitas as a third criterion, where English has "article progress" and "priority". Or perhaps both progress and priority could be divided into content and Latinitas, giving us four variables. But there still is the problem that the vast majority of our very best pages still don't go into as much depth as their vernacular equivalents, and so would not be rated terribly high if we end up using the same criteria. And I we probably SHOULD use the same criteria. --Iustinus 22:08, 20 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
- Could someone point me to where en: rates its articles? and on what basis? I'm not all that familiar with the world over there. IacobusAmor 03:31, 21 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
- I am refering to en:Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Assessment FAQ, which was at some pointed linked on this page, but now has been moved to interwiki. --Iustinus 07:49, 21 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
- Some projects try to get an overview about their articles, with templates like en:Template:Football (link is in vide etiam). However, templates like {{stipula}}, {{dubcat}}, {{dubium}}, ... are also a form of classification/rating. In fact classification would be a better term, maybe. ;-) --Rolandus 08:11, 21 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
- I am refering to en:Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Assessment FAQ, which was at some pointed linked on this page, but now has been moved to interwiki. --Iustinus 07:49, 21 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
- Could someone point me to where en: rates its articles? and on what basis? I'm not all that familiar with the world over there. IacobusAmor 03:31, 21 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps we could have Latinitas as a third criterion, where English has "article progress" and "priority". Or perhaps both progress and priority could be divided into content and Latinitas, giving us four variables. But there still is the problem that the vast majority of our very best pages still don't go into as much depth as their vernacular equivalents, and so would not be rated terribly high if we end up using the same criteria. And I we probably SHOULD use the same criteria. --Iustinus 22:08, 20 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, we are different. :-) This is why I thought we should have such a page and why I listed Latinitas very near to the top. And I like that you say we are generally more concerned with latinitas than content. I think so, too. This page is just a start. I think we need templates for every aspect where we do not have templates yet. Or maybe a template which combines these aspects. We should at least know what aspects are important for us. There might be even a level of latinitas which is worse than "maxcorrigenda" and where we want to say "that's too bad". Ioshus started a page Vicipaedia:Latinitas where we might discuss what levels of latinitas we want to distinguish and how we want to deal with the really bad articles. --Rolandus 21:51, 20 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
Speaking of latinitas... Movendan ad Vicipaedia:Aestimatio?
- Hmmm, not sure what the mot juste is, I guess Aestimatio is probably best. --Iustinus 22:08, 20 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)