Quality Score

chicscrapper

I do not find the quality score helpful at all. In fact, I find this change quite annoying.

1. It is now harder to click on an entry in the vital information and check to make sure the information (particularly the place) is standardized. It takes multiple clicks instead of just one which (I feel) will deter contributors from making adjustments.
2. When calculating the quality, I have seen records with one source marked high quality and records with numerous sources (with information that is consistent) being marked medium or low quality. Although you have explained how it makes the calculations, I don't trust the program.
3. I don't know why someone would find the quality score useful. Looking at the sources is much more reliable.

Gordon Collett

Whether or not a place is standardized shows right there on the profile page. You don't have to click on anything to see whether it is or not. For example, this place is not standardized:

When this is standardized it will look like this:

If you wish to see what standard is linked is to a place name which includes additional information to make that place name full, complete, accurate, specific, and precise, you can see the linked standard with just one click by clicking anywhere on the data to open the Data View popup:

Here you can see the full, complete place name which has been correctly recorded and linked as well as the less complete, less accurate, inferior, insufficient linked standardized value which should not be used by itself here since there is a better place name than the standardized value.

Adding the data quality routine has not changed this at all.

Julia Szent-Györgyi

@Gordon Collett, what the rating has added unneeded impedance to is seeing the type of the selected standard.

If a profile has been graded "high", then it now takes three clicks to see the place type, no matter what method you use:

- Edit pencil - Edit pencil again - click in placename box; or
- Conclusion - Edit pencil - click in placename box.

If a profile is deemed to be of "medium" quality or lower, then you can see the place type with two clicks:

- Edit pencil - click in placename box.

I know I'm not alone in finding it infuriating to need to repeat an action in order to actually achieve that action. When I click the edit pencil, I expect to be able to ::gasp!:: edit, not read about how the computer algorithm has decided for me that I shouldn't.

Gordon Collett

Yes, figuring out what the entered linked standard's type is is harder, but I was only commenting on the fact that you don't need to do anything at all to see if the place name is standardized or not.

I'm a bit concerned that we're going to get back into a discussion that standardization does not mean the place name can only be a standard and nothing more.