First information about conflict resolution - GikiCLEF - Cross-language Geographic Information Retrieval from Wikipedia

Revision as of 12:31, 18 June 2009

Follows ow the conflict resolution was done, and first impressions after looking at the conflicts as far as the very same answer in the same language and with the same justification is concerned.

We could identify four different cases

cases where it is easy to decide who is right (such as type mismatch or information in the page not understood by a non-native speaker, but that leaves no doubt)
cases where we do not know where the values "correct" or "incorrect" come from, and have to check how people did that classification: did they really know, or just expected that the predetermined answers were absolutely correct -- the all and only? If they did, this must be revised :-(
cases where there are genuine disagreements -- and these will be sent to the two or three parties involved, possibly also with copy to the topic owner
cases where different language Wikipedias actually say different things, and so each answer has to be considered individually. This is strictly speaking not a conflict between assessors but between infromation sources, but we have to deal with this with special care.

Retrieved from "https://www.linguateca.pt/GikiCLEF/index.php/First_information_about_conflict_resolution"

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-How the conflict resolution was done, and first impressions, follow.
+Follows ow the conflict resolution was done, and first impressions after looking at the conflicts as far as the very same answer in the same language and with the same justification is concerned.
 We could identify four different cases
-- cases where it is easy to decide who is right (such as type mismatch or information in the page not understood by a non-native speaker, but that leaves no doubt)
+* cases where it is easy to decide who is right (such as type mismatch or information in the page not understood by a non-native speaker, but that leaves no doubt)
-- cases where we do not know where the values "correct" or "incorrect" come from, and have to check how people did that classification: did they really know, or just expected that the predetermined answers were absolutely correct -- the all and only? If they did, this must be revised :-(
+* cases where we do not know where the values "correct" or "incorrect" come from, and have to check how people did that classification: did they really know, or just expected that the predetermined answers were absolutely correct -- the all and only? If they did, this must be revised :-(
-- cases where there are genuine disagreements -- and these will be sent to the two or three parties involved, possibly also with copy to the topic owner
+* cases where there are genuine disagreements -- and these will be sent to the two or three parties involved, possibly also with copy to the topic owner
-- cases where different language Wikipedias actually say different things, and so each answer has to be considered individually. This is strictly speaking not a conflict between assessors but between infromation sources, but we have to deal with this with special care.
+* cases where different language Wikipedias actually say different things, and so each answer has to be considered individually. This is strictly speaking not a conflict between assessors but between infromation sources, but we have to deal with this with special care.