Need your help with a collection of 0 reply threads

[Greg Bernhardt]

Hello team!

I need everyone's help! Yesterday I put into place a rule where if a thread didn't have a reply, it wouldn't be indexed by Google. This is an effort to reduce the cruft we're showing to Google as 0 reply threads are rarely good material for their search. Now, there are a number of 0 reply threads that do receive search traffic (some with tens of thousands of historical views) and we want to maintain and improve them in order to keep those search doors open so new members can find us.

I have a Google Sheet with 500 '0' reply threads that receive search traffic. Many of these are homework help threads. All we need to do is work down this list by giving each thread a great and helpful reply. This will then make the thread indexable again and will satisfy searchers and maybe we'll get some new members.

If we each can do 10-20 over the next few days this list will be toast! I'll open this up to regular members if there is not enough support. Thank you for any help you can offer!

Google sheets link

 

[Bandersnatch]

Based on a sample of 1, it looks like some of those are insights that hardly require answers.

 

[Orodruin]

Based on a sample of 1, it looks like some of those are insights that hardly require answers.

I have a sample bigger than one …

 

[fresh_42]

I have a sample bigger than one …

Indeed.

 

[phinds]

Yeah, I've done a couple that were trivial and just required confirmation that the OP got it right.

@Greg Bernhardt --- a suggestion. Please reduce this list every now and then to only ones that are still zero else we'll all waste time looking at ones that have now been answered.

 

[fresh_42]

And we need edit access for the sheet. I couldn't set the checkboxes.

 

[Vanadium 50]

I clicked on one = it was homework from 2009. I suggest that you delete any homework threads more than a year old without answers, and we can concentrate on what's left.

 

[phinds]

Ah. I didn't see the check-boxes, and yeah, we can't actually USE them ...

 

[phinds]

I clicked on one = it was homework from 2009. I suggest that you delete any homework threads more than a year old without answers, and we can concentrate on what's left.

Seems like Greg's goal here is not so much providing info to the world as providing PF with more traffic.

This will then make the thread indexable again and will satisfy searchers and maybe we'll get some new members.

 

[fresh_42]

I clicked on one = it was homework from 2009. I suggest that you delete any homework threads more than a year old without answers, and we can concentrate on what's left.

I had a homework from 2012. I simply solved it so that we have an exemplary solution.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Seems like Greg's goal here is not so much providing info to the world as providing PF with more traffic.

They are one in the same. Edit access granted, thanks!

 

[Bandersnatch]

I have a sample bigger than one …

If you've read more than one thread, sure. ;)

 

[phinds]

They are one in the same. Edit access granted, thanks!

Edit access to WHAT? The check boxes are still not available. Also, they require a side-to-side scroll which I hate, SO ... I've given up on the check boxes Greg, and I suggest again that you pare down the list every now and then to only those posts that still have no responses.

 

[berkeman]

I'll open this up to regular members if there is not enough support.

You might want to just make a general announcement today in the Feedback forum so the regular users know why so many old threads are showing up in the What's New page. You can just say that the Advisors are working on a project to help clean up old threads for now.

 

[anorlunda]

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/what-is-the-total-mass-energy-of-the-universe.506985/

LOL. This one was posted by a young fellow by the name of @Greg Bernhardt. It says it is a FAQ, and thus did not invite any replies.

I just replied, "thanks for sharing."

 

[phinds]

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/what-is-the-total-mass-energy-of-the-universe.506985/

LOL. This one was posted by a young fellow by the name of @Greg Bernhardt. It says it is a FAQ, and thus did not invite any replies.

I just replied, "thanks for sharing."

Yeah, I've done the same on one or two of his other "info only" type posts.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Edit access to WHAT? The check boxes are still not available. Also, they require a side-to-side scroll which I hate, SO ... I've given up on the check boxes Greg, and I suggest again that you pare down the list every now and then to only those posts that still have no responses.

Sorry the link is above the generated embed

 

[phinds]

Sorry the link is above the generated embed

Got it. Much more useable.

 

[mathwonk]

"What is work done?" is another one posted by Greg with the only question asked being "who wrote this?" which apparently no one here has answered?there are not a lot of maths ones. I answered the first one about tangent lines to parabolas, and much later found the next one is a problem posed to calculate tangent, normal, binormal, curvature, and torsion in a single specific example, with no work shown. I consider such questions not worth answering. I would delete it.

I also "answered" an apparently nonsensical attempt at a limit calculation which began by setting (2n)^(1/n) = 1+Kn. In this case an answer of form "I don't understand why you began this way" might have been appropriate, but it apparently takes an almost saintly patience to reply to an entire page of nonsense.

In fact I would suggest a more efficient and reasonably fair way to deal with the questions I have seen is to delete them after a certain amount of time with no answers. I.e. there seems to be mostly a good reason these have not been answered.

Apologies for the unsaintly response!

 

[DaveE]

I've done 4 or 5 so far and they all were over 10 years old. Now the "what's new" menu is filling up with new answers to old posts. Be sure to check the OP date before you add on to those threads, it's not about the OP anymore.

 

[fresh_42]

"What is work done?" is another one posted by Greg with the only question asked being "who wrote this?" which apparently no one here has answered?there are not a lot of maths ones. I answered the first one about tangent lines to parabolas, and much later found the next one is a problem posed to calculate tangent, normal, binormal, curvature, and torsion in a single specific example, with no work shown. I consider such questions not worth answering. I would delete it.

You can go to the Google link in post #1 and once you replied in a thread, you can mark the thread in the sheet by checking the box in the 3rd column. I checked two of your posts as I visited them while unchecked.

In case anyone lost the line with the thread, Ctrl+F yields the search box and the red number in
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/derivation-of-torsion-equations.233787/#post-6647881
is the one to find the line with the thread. (The link can be found under "my content".)

Just a remark: It actually does look a bit eerie if posts are answered 10 years later. I hope people won't find them if they ask again about response times on PF.

 

[fresh_42]

@Greg Bernhardt You said 1,000 posts but the count is 500. Did I accidentally delete a few hundred while trying (in vain) to get the boxes underlined so that the checkboxes are easier to find? I hope you have a copy.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Ah mistype, I had 1000 originally, there are in fact about 25k threads, but only the top 500 or so is reasonable to ask assistance on

 

[phinds]

there are in fact about 25k threads

AAACCCKKKKK ! thanks for "only" giving us 500

 

[phinds]

Are you going to delete the others?

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Are you going to delete the others?

No I just will leave them as "noindex".

 

[fresh_42]

Wouldn't it make more sense if we could use tags? How often do we look up internet pages to answer something: definitions on Wikipedia, lecture notes on Google, or similar things. We could copy every search key to? Yeah, how could we create Google tags without writing complicated sentences to display them?

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Wouldn't it make more sense if we could use tags? How often do we look up internet pages to answer something: definitions on Wikipedia, lecture notes on Google, or similar things. We could copy every search key to? Yeah, how could we create Google tags without writing complicated sentences to display them?

What is a Google tag?

 

[Astronuc]

I have a Google Sheet with 1000 0 reply threads that receive search traffic. Many of these are homework help threads. All we need to do is work down this list by giving each thread a great and helpful reply. This will then make the thread indexable again and will satisfy searchers and maybe we'll get some new members.

The first one I see on the list is
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/.610398
Methods used to measure the density of solid materials and liquids.

The post is from May 31, 2012, and the OP, Aaron9890 was last seen June 22, 2012. Certainly the response rate needs improving. In this case, the HW is 10 years old, so it's been done a long time ago.

It's an interesting subject, and the user demonstrated some effort and showed the work. Pity it didn't receive a timely response.

 

[fresh_42]

What is a Google tag?

I don't know, some key that makes Google index it. E.g., we can add tags on WordPress to categorize our articles. Maybe something like that would be possible here.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I don't know, some key that makes Google index it. E.g., we can add tags on WordPress to categorize our articles. Maybe something like that would be possible here.

We do have the ability to add topical tags to threads

 

[fresh_42]

We do have the ability to add topical tags to threads

At which level? It looks as if only moderators could do this, and only outside of the thread on the forum list. A bit too complicated and elitist I think. Do such tags regulate anything, or what is the effect? I would have tested it but didn't see how to remove the result again.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

At which level? It looks as if only moderators could do this, and only outside of the thread on the forum list. A bit too complicated and elitist I think. Do such tags regulate anything, or what is the effect? I would have tested it but didn't see how to remove the result again.

During the creation of a thread, you have the option of adding a tag. They are just for categorizing.

 

[Astronuc]

The first one I see on the list is
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/.610398
Methods used to measure the density of solid materials and liquids.

I wrote a short, but very belated response.

Part of the topic is measurement techniques and measurement error/uncertainty. Is there an Insight article on these subjects/topics?

 

[PeterDonis]

Many of these are homework help threads.

A few spot checks indicate to me that many of these threads are very old (I have so far found ones from 2004 to 2009). That means that, even if we make a response, the person seeking the homework help is most likely long gone, which defeats the whole purpose of homework help threads. Either we would just have to post the solution, or IMO we should delete the thread rather than try to make it useful for a search engine.

I have also come across at least one thread (the "what is Coulomb gauge" one) that is a comment thread on an Insights article. IMO having those indexed by Google is useful even if there are no (or very few) responses since they link to the Insights articles themselves.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Either we would just have to post the solution, or IMO we should delete the thread rather than try to make it useful for a search engine.

Yes, walkthrough solutions would be fine, this is for readers' benefit. We should try to not shut doors Google still cracks open.

I have also come across at least one thread (the "what is Coulomb gauge" one) that is a comment thread on an Insights article. IMO having those indexed by Google is useful even if there are no (or very few) responses since they link to the Insights articles themselves.

Agreed

 

[PeterDonis]

Agreed

I think this would also apply to the threads which are posts based on old "Library" entries (like the "what is work done" one). In today's PF they would be Insights articles.

 

[mathwonk]

The one I thought was nonsense actually made sense to me after a long hiatus at the beach to think about it. When I got back, DrMalawi had already posted a clarification along the lines I was thinking of so I answered in that vein. The problem was the poster was using symbols with no attention at all to quantifiers explaining which symbols depended on which others. I.e. I thought he was choosing a K to make two expressions equal for all n, whereas he was choosing a different K for each n. So it was the huge distinction between "there is some K such that for all n, we have..." and "for every n, there is some K such that we have..." Since neither one was stated, I had no idea what was meant and made the wrong assumption. Oh yes and apparently also a subscript was written as a factor, hence the function K(n) was written as the product Kn, further confusing me.

 

[Vanadium 50]

I've seen people respond to a thread with a request for more information - on a 15 year old thread where the Op has been gone for 10 years.

Is that what you want, Greg?

Really?

 

[fresh_42]

I've seen people respond to a thread with a request for more information - on a 15 year old thread where the Op has been gone for 10 years.

Is that what you want, Greg?

Really?

I deleted at least two threads that required more information or dialogue. But I also resolved a problem and added an explanation video in a thread about torque. No one said one method fits all.

... and I have a serious motivation problem with that one ...

Now this is a lot of work, especially when it comes to finding the torsion $$\tau=−\dfrac{d\overrightarrow{B}}{ds}\cdot \overrightarrow{N}$$
a total of four derivitives.

 

[vanhees71]

Well, if the question is interesting, why not answering a decade-old thread?

Another question: How is it with the Homework Section? I guess for this purpose we should give simply the solution and not try to guide the long-gone OP to an own one, right?

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I've seen people respond to a thread with a request for more information - on a 15 year old thread where the Op has been gone for 10 years.

Is that what you want, Greg?

Really?

Yes this not about the OP but searchers and readers

 

[phinds]

I've seen people respond to a thread with a request for more information - on a 15 year old thread where the Op has been gone for 10 years.

I interpreted Greg's request as being that we should answer the posts as if they were posted today. Asking for more info emphasizes that requirement for new members, even if it does seem a silly way to answer a decade old post to an OP who is long gone.

 

[.Scott]

I've seen people respond to a thread with a request for more information - on a 15 year old thread where the Op has been gone for 10 years.

Is that what you want, Greg?

Number 29, https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/voltage-amplifier-transistor-circuit-diagram-provided.232024/ (14 years old), provides a hotlink diagram that is no longer available. It is a critical part of the problem statement. I will respond by asking for the poster to provide a fresh link.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Number 29, https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/voltage-amplifier-transistor-circuit-diagram-provided.232024/ (14 years old), provides a hotlink diagram that is no longer available. It is a critical part of the problem statement. I will respond by asking for the poster to provide a fresh link.

This is a reasonable example of a thread we could delete if the source material is missing.

 

[fresh_42]

This is a reasonable example of a thread we could delete if the source material is missing.

Done.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Awesome day 1 progress! Let's keep chipping away
google sheets link

 

[Astronuc]

I interpreted Greg's request as being that we should answer the posts as if they were posted today. Asking for more info emphasizes that requirement for new members, even if it does seem a silly way to answer a decade old post to an OP who is long gone.

First thing I do is check the date of the post and the date of when the member was last seen on PF.

It's best to address the post rather than the poster, since often in such posts, the member is long gone and the HW assignment has been completed (on not) long ago.

Certainly, on some where effort and work is lacking, one can simply state, "PF requires members to show work and demonstrate effort." That said, some helpful direction might be appropriate, primarily for others looking to solve a similar problem.

 

[phinds]

Could you either (1) redo the spreadsheet to drop the already answered threads or (2) sort the list so that the answered ones (checked) are all at the end?

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Could you either (1) redo the spreadsheet to drop the already answered threads or (2) sort the list so that the answered ones (checked) are all at the end?

I set a filter to only show unmarked