| # | Article | POV Score ▼ | Editors | Length | Peacock | Citations | Account |
|---|
Each article is scored across five dimensions. Sub-scores are normalised to 0–1 and combined with the following weights:
| Signal | Weight | What it measures |
|---|---|---|
| Editor Concentration | 30% | Byte share of top editor via revision history. High = one person wrote almost everything. |
| Peacock Language | 25% | Density of promotional/superlative terms (WP:PEACOCK + WP:WEASEL word lists). |
| Length Anomaly | 20% | Article size relative to the category median. Outsized articles score higher. |
| Citation Quality | 15% | Proportion of references using self-published, primary, or obscure sources. |
| Account Signals | 10% | Whether the creator dominates the revision history, edits anonymously, or made rapid bulk additions. |
Scores ≥ 0.65 (red) suggest strong autobiographical promotion signals. Scores 0.40–0.65 (amber) warrant a closer look. Scores < 0.40 (teal) are likely organic. This is a heuristic — always verify manually before taking action.
The tool uses the MediaWiki API with limited revision depth (configurable). Token-level authorship (WikiWho) is not used. Citation analysis checks domain patterns, not full source reliability. Some legitimate articles about obscure-but-notable people may score high.