Jump to content

User:Digitect

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contributions

[edit]

Editor at Wikipedia since 2004 and author or major contributor for the following articles, among others:

Flag of North Carolina
North Carolina
Flag of South Carolina
South Carolina
Alabama
Alabama
Arkansas
Arkansas

Off-site Interests

[edit]

Exploration into Automated Sourcing

[edit]

Background

[edit]

It is common on Wikipedia for tables of data be derived from surrounding information. It should be immediately obvious that tables are summaries of narrative.

For larger bodies of information, these tables may become quite large. On Wikipedia, perhaps too large to fit within the narrative from which it is sourced, and so, broken out onto a separate page.

The Problem

[edit]

(1) Isn't it immediately obvious that tables derived from linked pages are sourced by those constituent pages?

Apparently not. I've been bumping in to more and more pages deleted for only this reason. There's actually a little self-appointed deletion gang running around removing pages they don't understand. It's hard to believe that Wikipedia has devolved into such a simplistic mechanism, but I guess it's inevitable that an increasing number of users won't remember back to the approach when it was founded. Back then, we were all simply trying to make it better. You researched and referenced where missing, and edited and improved where lacking. In that context, deletion is just lazy. Nobody did that back in the day except to address graffiti and vandalism. But we didn't keep track of our editing statistics back then, either. The whole place would improve if editing stats were anonymous and nobody could brag about how much they've done. I seem to recall that's why wikis started in the first place, Wikipedia, too. But I digress.

So if cross-linked pages are not enough to imply derived sourcing, what else could we do?

Options

[edit]

(2) We could cut/paste sources between the narrative and summary pages. Again, this seems obvious to say, but that would be disastrous:

  • Manual repetition of sourcing is risky. It is a likely way to introduce topographic errors.
  • Maintaining two different locations to a single reference is virtually impossible without an automated cross-reference system.
  • Sourcing in narrative connects with a different mental model than for raw data, despite being the same. Over-eager editors reading too quickly could mistakenly disconnect one but not the other.

So...

(3) Could WP develop a more sophisticated method for connecting the dots? An interconnected cross-referencing system for sources would solve everything. It needs to be sophisticated enough that a new editor would understand the many-to-many nature of the process.

Example

[edit]

This is only one particular example of a large table derived from many well-sourced pages. (The original page was Comparison of Canon EOS digital cameras and was deleted 2020-05-02T03:00:49, citing lack of sources, despite having 1,394,082 total views, 24,458 monthly average lifetime, and 789 daily average the past year. It had 1,349 data points (19 columns x 71 rows) and was developed by users with 162 different logins over 11 years. It's hard to believe a few youngsters thought that kind of contribution didn't weigh enough in its favor, but as I said previously, WP has been under new management for a while and has been off the trail in the woods for a quite few years.)

For a page like this, what would an automated cross-referencing system look like?

(NOTE: This is historical and is being used as test data, do not reference.)


Model Image processor Sensor format Megapixels Min ISO Max ISO Autofocus points Viewfinder magnification, coverage Display Live view Max FPS Storage Release date Weight (kg) Dimensions, WxHxD (mm) Video
1Ds 1 DIGIC Full-frame CMOS 11.4 50 1250 45 0.70×, 100% 2.0", 0120k pixels No 3 CF 2002Q4 1.265 156 × 158 × 80 -
1Ds Mk II 2 DIGIC II Full-frame CMOS 16.7 50 3200 45 0.70×, 100% 2.0", 0230k pixels No 4.5 CF, SD 2004Q4 1.215 156 × 158 × 80 -
1Ds Mk III 3D Dual DIGIC III Full-frame CMOS 21.1 50 3200 45 0.76×, 100% 3.0", 0230k pixels Yes 5.0 CF, SD 2007Q4 1.210 156 × 160 × 80 -
1D 1 DIGIC APS-H CCD 4 100 3200 45 0.72×, 100% 2.0", 0120k pixels No 8.0 CF 2001Q4 1.250 156 × 158 × 80 -
1D Mk II 2 DIGIC II APS-H CMOS 8.2 50 3200 45 0.72×, 100% 2.0", 0230k pixels No 8.5 CF, SD 2004Q2 1.220 156 × 158 × 80 -
1D Mk II N 2 DIGIC II APS-H CMOS 8.2 50 3200 45 0.72×, 100% 2.5", 0230k pixels No 8.5 CF, SD 2005Q3 1.225 156 × 158 × 80 -
1D Mk III 3D Dual DIGIC III APS-H CMOS 10.1 50 6400 45 0.76×, 100% 3.0", 0230k pixels Yes 10 CF, SD 2007Q1 1.155 156 × 157 × 80 -
1D Mk IV 4D Dual DIGIC 4 APS-H CMOS 16.1 50 102,400 45 0.76×, 100% 3.0", 0920k pixels Yes 10 CF, SD 2009Q4 1.180 156 × 157 × 80 1080p30
1D X 5 D Dual DIGIC 5 Full-frame CMOS 18.1 50 204,800 61 0.76×, 100% 3.2", 1040k pixels Yes 14 CF (×2) 2012Q2 1.530 158 × 164 × 83 1080p30, 720p60
1D C 5 D Dual DIGIC 5 Full-frame CMOS 18.1 50 204,800 61 0.76×, 100% 3.2", 1040k pixels Yes 14 CF (×2) 2012Q2 1.530 158 × 164 × 83 4K, 1080p30, 720p60
5D 2 DIGIC II Full-frame CMOS 12.8 50 3200 9 0.71×, 96% 2.5", 0230k pixels No 3 CF 2005Q3 0.81 152 × 113 × 75 -
5D Mk II 4 DIGIC 4 Full-frame CMOS 21.1 50 25,600 9 0.71×, 98% 3.0", 0920k pixels Yes 3.9 CF 2008Q4 0.81 152 × 113 × 75 1080p30, 480p30
5D Mk III 5 DIGIC 5 Full-frame CMOS 22.3 50 102,400 61 0.71×, 100% 3.2", 1040k pixels Yes 6 CF, SD 2012Q1 0.95 152 × 116 × 76 1080p30, 720p60
5Ds / 5Ds R 6D Dual DIGIC 6 Full-frame CMOS 50.6 50 12,800 61 0.71×, 100% 3.2", 1040k pixels Yes 5 CF, SDXC (UHS-I) 2015Q2 0.93 152 × 116 × 76 1080p30, 720p60
6D 5 DIGIC 5 Full-frame CMOS 20.2 50 102,400 11 0.71×, 97% 3.0", 1040k pixels Yes 4.5 SDXC (UHS-I) 2012Q4 0.77 145 × 111 × 71 1080p30, 720p60
7D 4D Dual DIGIC 4 APS-C CMOS 18 100 12,800 19 1.0×, 100% 3.0", 0920k pixels Yes 8 CF 2009Q3 0.82 148 × 111 × 74 1080p30, 720p60
7D Mk II 6D Dual DIGIC 6 APS-C CMOS 20.2 100 51,200 65 1.0×, 100% 3.0", 1040k pixels Yes 10 CF, SDXC 2014Q3 0.91 149 × 112 × 78 1080p60, 720p60
D30 APS-C CMOS 3.1 100 1600 3 0.88×, 95% 1.8", 0114k pixels No 3 CF 2000Q2 0.78 150 × 107 × 75 -
D60 0 APS-C CMOS 6.3 100 1000 3 0.88×, 95% 1.8", 0114k pixels No 3 CF 2002Q1 0.78 150 × 107 × 75 -
10D 1 DIGIC APS-C CMOS 6.3 100 3200 7 0.88×, 95% 1.8", 0118k pixels No 3 CF 2003Q1 0.79 150 × 108 × 75 -
20D 2 DIGIC II APS-C CMOS 8.2 100 3200 9 0.90×, 95% 1.8", 0118k pixels No 5 CF 2004Q3 0.685 144 × 106 × 72 -
20Da 2 DIGIC II APS-C CMOS 8.2 100 3200 9 0.90×, 95% 1.8", 0118k pixels Yes 5 CF 2005Q1 0.685 144 × 106 × 72 -
30D 2 DIGIC II APS-C CMOS 8.2 100 3200 9 0.90×, 95% 2.5", 0230k pixels No 5 CF 2006Q1 0.7 144 × 106 × 74 -
40D 3 DIGIC III APS-C CMOS 10.1 100 3200 9 0.95×, 95% 3.0", 0230k pixels Yes 6.5 CF 2007Q3 0.74 146 × 108 × 74 -
50D 4 DIGIC 4 APS-C CMOS 15.1 100 12,800 9 0.95×, 95% 3.0", 0920k pixels Yes 6.3 CF 2008Q4 0.73 146 × 108 × 74 Via open source (Magic Lantern)
60D 4 DIGIC 4 APS-C CMOS 18 100 12,800 9 0.95×, 96% 3.0", 1040k pixels, 3:2, articulated Yes 5.3 SDXC 2010Q3 0.755 145 × 106 × 79 1080p30, 720p60
60Da 4 DIGIC 4 APS-C CMOS 18 100 12,800 9 0.95×, 96% 3.0", 1040k pixels, 3:2, articulated Yes 5.3 SDXC 2012Q2 0.755 145 × 106 × 79 1080p30, 720p60
70D 5 DIGIC 5 APS-C CMOS 20.2 100 25,600 19 0.95×, 98% 3.0", 1040k pixels, 3:2, articulated touchscreen Yes 7 SDXC (UHS-I) 2013Q3 0.755 139 × 104.3 × 78.5 1080p30, 720p60
300D
Digital Rebel
1 DIGIC APS-C CMOS 6.3 100 1600 7 0.80×, 95% 1.8", 0118k pixels No 2.5 CF 2003Q3 0.694 142 × 99 × 72 -
350D
Rebel XT
2 DIGIC II APS-C CMOS 8.0 100 1600 7 0.80×, 95% 1.8", 0115k pixels No 3 CF 2005Q1 0.54 127 × 94 × 64 -
400D
Rebel XTi
2 DIGIC II APS-C CMOS 10.1 100 1600 9 0.80×, 95% 2.5", 0230k pixels No 3 CF 2007Q1 0.51 127 × 94 × 65 -
450D
Rebel XSi
3 DIGIC III APS-C CMOS 12.2 100 1600 9 0.87×, 95% 3.0", 0230k pixels Yes 3.5 SDHC 2008Q2 0.475 129 × 98 × 62 via open source software to computer
500D
Rebel T1i
4 DIGIC 4 APS-C CMOS 15.1 100 12,800 9 0.87×, 95% 3.0", 0920k pixels Yes 3.4 SDHC 2009Q1 0.48 129 × 98 × 62 1080p20, 720p30
550D
Rebel T2i
4 DIGIC 4 APS-C CMOS 18 100 12,800 9 0.87×, 95% 3.0", 1040k pixels, 3:2 Yes 3.7 SDXC 2010Q1 0.53 129 × 98 × 62 1080p30, 720p50
600D
Rebel T3i
4 DIGIC 4 APS-C CMOS 18 100 12,800 9 0.85×, 95% 3.0", 1040k pixels, 3:2, articulated Yes 3.7 SDXC 2011Q1 0.57 133 × 100 × 80 1080p30, 720p60
650D
Rebel T4i
5 DIGIC 5 APS-C CMOS 18 100 25,600 9 0.85×, 95% 3.0", 1040k pixels, 3:2, articulated touchscreen Yes 5.0 SDXC (UHS-I) 2012Q2 0.58 134 × 100 × 79 1080p30, 720p60
700D
Rebel T5i
5 DIGIC 5 APS-C CMOS 18 100 25,600 9 0.85×, 95% 3.0", 1040k pixels, 3:2, articulated touchscreen Yes 5.0 SDXC (UHS-I) 2013Q1 0.58 134 × 100 × 79 1080p30, 720p60
750D
Rebel T6i
6 DIGIC 6 APS-C CMOS 24.2 100 25,600 19 0.82×, 95% 3.0", 1040k pixels, 3:2, articulated touchscreen Yes 5.0 SDXC (UHS-I) 2015Q2 0.555 132 × 101 × 78 1080p30, 720p60
760D
Rebel T6s
6 DIGIC 6 APS-C CMOS 24.2 100 25,600 19 0.82×, 95% 3.0", 1040k pixels, 3:2, articulated touchscreen Yes 5.0 SDXC (UHS-I) 2015Q2 0.565 132 × 101 × 78 1080p30, 720p60
1000D
Rebel XS
3 DIGIC III APS-C CMOS 10.1 100 1600 7 0.81×, 95% 2.5", 0230k pixels Yes 3 SDHC 2008Q3 0.45 126 × 98 × 62 via open source software to computer
1100D
Rebel T3
4 DIGIC 4 APS-C CMOS 12.1 100 6400 9 0.80×, 95% 2.7", 0230k pixels Yes 3 SDXC 2011Q1 0.495 130 × 100 × 78 720p30
1200D
Rebel T5
4 DIGIC 4 APS-C CMOS 18 100 6400 9 0.80×, 95% 3.0", 0460k pixels Yes 3 SDXC 2014Q1 0.48 130 × 100 × 88 1080p30, 720p60
100D
Rebel SL1
5 DIGIC 5 APS-C CMOS 18 100 25,600 9 0.87×, 95% 3.0", 1040k pixels, 3:2, touchscreen Yes 4.0 SDXC (UHS-I) 2013Q1 0.41 117 × 91 × 69 1080p30, 720p60
M 5 DIGIC 5 APS-C CMOS 18 100 25,600 31 (Max) - 3.0", 1040k pixels, 3:2, touchscreen Yes (only) 4.3 SDXC (UHS-I) 2012Q3 0.262 108.6 × 66.5 × 32.3 1080p30, 720p60
M3 6 DIGIC 6 APS-C CMOS 24 100 25,600 49 - 3.0", 1040k pixels, 3:2, touchscreen Yes (only) 4.2 SDXC (UHS-I) 2015Q1 0.366 111 × 68 × 44 1080p30, 720p60
M10 6 DIGIC 6 APS-C CMOS 18 100 25,600 49 3.0", 1040k pixels, 3:2, tiltable touchscreen Yes (only) 4.6 SD, SDHC or SDXC 2015Q4 0.301 108 × 67 × 35 1080p30, 720p60
Model Image processor Sensor format Megapixels Min ISO Max ISO Autofocus points Viewfinder magnification, coverage Display Live view Max FPS Storage Release date Weight (kg) Dimensions, WxHxD (mm) Video