War Diaries Talk

Article on OWD published on Friday 19th February 2016

  • rsgrayson by rsgrayson scientist

    An article I have written using data from OWD is due to be published tomorrow (Fri 19th Feb) in the open access British Journal for Military History. I'll post links when they are live.

    Richard Grayson

    Posted

  • marie.eklidvirginmedia.com by marie.eklidvirginmedia.com

    Look forward to you posting the links regarding data from OWD. They should be very interesting to read.

    Posted

  • ral104 by ral104 moderator, scientist

    Fantastic! Looking forward to it.

    Posted

  • rsgrayson by rsgrayson scientist

    Article now at: http://bjmh.org.uk/index.php/bjmh/article/view/96

    News items at:
    http://www.gold.ac.uk/news/operation-war-diary/
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-35611969

    Thanks to all volunteers!

    Best wishes,
    Richard

    Posted

  • marie.eklidvirginmedia.com by marie.eklidvirginmedia.com

    Thank you for releasing all the information and links from your very interesting article which I enjoyed reading. The section concerning the work done by Citizen Historians was very informative, especially the diary page showing how the tags were collated. Well Done!

    Posted

  • josiepegg by josiepegg

    A very interesting article - thank you for sharing it with us. It is useful to know how the information from tagging is collated and how it can be used. It is also good to see that the statistics reflect what we have been observing whilst tagging. Very encouraging!

    Posted

  • rsgrayson by rsgrayson scientist

    Thanks for your comments!!

    Posted

  • ral104 by ral104 moderator, scientist

    A really fascinating article - thanks for providing the links. It's great to get a sense of what OWD can offer both in terms of breadth of analysis and provision of quantifiable evidence to challenge existing assumptions.

    As you suggest, it would be very interesting to look at the tags where consensus hasn't been reached (particularly in terms of the volunteer profile - i.e. how many of the non-consensus tags were placed by volunteers who were not familiar with the diaries), but perhaps also at the level of consensus in the other tags. Early on during the project, we actually changed the rules to require 7 taggers per page and then took this back down to 5 because we felt it was a good compromise between accuracy and an increased 'finish' rate. It might be instructive to examine data generated under the two different rules at this point.

    Posted

  • rsgrayson by rsgrayson scientist

    Thanks ral104. Those are definitely good ideas to look at in a future piece.

    Best wishes,
    Richard

    Posted