| content | "<p><strong>External signals -- using non-Wikipedia signals of importance</strong></p>
<p>Sometimes Wikimedia content doesn’t exist, but the public might be looking for that topic. Because we don’t have people searching for that topic yet on Wikipedia, we can't see this need in the data. Here are some other ways you might identify gaps using outside data:</p>
<style><!--
.table-container {
display: flex;
flex-direction: column;
align-items: center;
}
.table-row {
display: flex;
flex-direction: row;
margin: 10px 0;
align-items: center;
}
.table-column {
flex: 1;
padding: 10px;
box-sizing: border-box;
}
.table-image {
max-width: 100%;
height: auto;
}
--></style>
<div class="table-container">
<div class="table-row">
<div class="table-column"><img src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1a/Twitter_topic_icon.svg/640px-Twitter_topic_icon.svg.png" alt="Trending Topics Icon" class="table-image" /></div>
<div class="table-column">
<ul>
<li>Identifying trending concepts in external news or social media sources (i.e. upcoming sporting events, anticipating political or other controversies, connecting breaking news with historical locations or trends).</li>
<li>Looking at other knowledge platforms that are important for the results on Search Engines, and identifying topics that are covered in those websites. For example, looking for trending topics on Quora or Reddit.</li>
<li>Identifying areas of knowledge that Wikipedia is particularly weak, and thus our existing data is likely not very useful (i.e. Agricultural knowledge, information about construction practices, etc).</li>
</ul>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p></p>
<p>Once you have identified these gaps, comparing Wikimedia content to more useful sources of information on the topic to identify priority places to start. For example, many language Wikipedias have compared their content with important print encyclopedias in their own language.</p>" |
|---|