Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
This article has been reviewed as part of
Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the
Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a
Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through
WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at
WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far.
-- Malleus Fatuorum 22:04, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the review, you've bought up some good points. - Francis Tyers · 10:27, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
-- Malleus Fatuorum 11:49, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
I have no particular complaints about the edits, they are mostly for style than anything else, and they in some cases leave the text clearer although in other cases give no substantive improvement. I would ask that the following parts be re-inserted:
The metric works by measuring the n-gram (sequences of one or more words) co-occurrence between a given translation and the set of reference translations and then taking the weighted geometric mean.
and
The quality of translation is indicated as a number between 0 and 1 and is measured as statistical closeness to a given set of good quality human reference translations.
This quote is also useful:
The central idea behind the metric is that, "the closer a machine translation is to a professional human translation, the better it is". [1]
Please feel free to paraphrase it, but I think that it is worthwhile including. I also prefer the wording "report a high correlation ..." to "demonstrate a ..."
- Francis Tyers · 14:19, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the work that's been done to address my concerns; I'm now satisfied that the article meets the GA criteria, so I'm closing the review. -- Malleus Fatuorum 00:24, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
This article has been reviewed as part of
Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the
Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a
Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through
WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at
WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far.
-- Malleus Fatuorum 22:04, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the review, you've bought up some good points. - Francis Tyers · 10:27, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
-- Malleus Fatuorum 11:49, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
I have no particular complaints about the edits, they are mostly for style than anything else, and they in some cases leave the text clearer although in other cases give no substantive improvement. I would ask that the following parts be re-inserted:
The metric works by measuring the n-gram (sequences of one or more words) co-occurrence between a given translation and the set of reference translations and then taking the weighted geometric mean.
and
The quality of translation is indicated as a number between 0 and 1 and is measured as statistical closeness to a given set of good quality human reference translations.
This quote is also useful:
The central idea behind the metric is that, "the closer a machine translation is to a professional human translation, the better it is". [1]
Please feel free to paraphrase it, but I think that it is worthwhile including. I also prefer the wording "report a high correlation ..." to "demonstrate a ..."
- Francis Tyers · 14:19, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the work that's been done to address my concerns; I'm now satisfied that the article meets the GA criteria, so I'm closing the review. -- Malleus Fatuorum 00:24, 11 March 2009 (UTC)