adesh saxena

Consultant ENT Surgeon, Indian Medical Association

This conversation is closed.

What should be a featured conversation on TED?How and who should decide?Wikipedia chooses its featured articles with established criterias.

What is a featured conversation on TED? Who decides it?How it is decided?Wikipedia chooses it featured articles with a well established criteria, as follows..

My suggestion are
1.Any conversation accepted or refused should be provided with a reason, it will help people to write good conversations
2. conversation should be included in featured list after one week of being accepted and published under newly created heading "conversation under evaluation."
3. Set well defined crietria for evaluation
4. A group of TED administrators, speakers and featured candidates will evaluate the article.

Featured articles in Wikipedia

Featured articles are considered to be the best articles Wikipedia has to offer, as determined by Wikipedia's editors. They are used by editors as examples for writing other articles. Before being listed here, articles are reviewed as featured article candidates for accuracy, neutrality, completeness, and style according to our featured article criteria.
A featured article exemplifies our very best work and is distinguished by professional standards of writing, presentation, and sourcing. In addition to meeting the policies regarding content for all Wikipedia articles, it has the following attributes.
It is—
well-written: its prose is engaging, even brilliant, and of a professional standard;
comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context;
well-researched: it is a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature. Claims are verifiable against high-quality reliable sources and are supported by inline citations where appropriate;
neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias; and
stable: it is not subject to ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured article process.
It follows the style guidelines, including the provision of—
a lead: a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader

  • thumb
    Jun 3 2013: I agree with Fritzie in most part. The caveat I think is whoever form the panel of experts to decide the featured conversations, it is bound to draw some criticism. So unless there is more rational choice, TED without any name is better.
    I am all for transparency, but running a website like TED may have altogether different dynamics that the conversationalists may not know at all.
    One good measure can be to depend on the users themselves. The most thumbed up conversations can be featured but with the subtext : popular.
    TED can curate best 10 (or any given number) conversations and showcase separately, or even incetivize by prizes.

    One thing I am wary of is that there should not be any attempt to give direction to a conversation. A free conversation is often chaotic but one who is interested can always seek out the inspirational and insightful comments.
    • thumb
      Jun 4 2013: Featured conversations should be chosen with great care, by a group of people varying in their back grounds.

      I like the popular vote.

      Incentive to write a good conversation will help.
  • thumb
    Jun 3 2013: My suggestion are
    1.Any Conversation accepted or refused should be provided with a reason, it will help people to write good conversations
    2. Conversation should be included in featured list after one weak of being accepted and published under newly created heading " Conversation under evaluation."
    3. Set well defined crietria for evaluation
    4. A group of TED administrators, speakers and featured candidates will evaluate the Conversation..
  • thumb
    Jun 5 2013: TED needs to be more popular
  • thumb
    Jun 4 2013: Thanks Amgad

    There seems to be shortage of man power and not brain power.
  • thumb
    Jun 4 2013: Hi TED administrators, Hosts, people responsible for running this site

    We would love to hear from you...

    What is a featured conversation on TED? How and who decides?
  • thumb
    Jun 3 2013: Since TED already sensors the conversations and choose what gets published and what's not, one would assume that all conversations here are valuable since they passed the filtration process.

    In this case I would prefer if the selection in the feature section was algorithmic. Depending on the days left for the discussion, the volume of interaction, the category, etc.
  • thumb
    Jun 3 2013: If I were choosing featured conversations, I would probably choose those that seem likely to promote discussion rich in ideas, that can be approached from various angles, that provide a good chance of creative collaboration drawing on the varied skills and experiences of a diverse community, and that offer new food for thought (rather than questions that are asked and discussed all the time)

    I would feature conversations that showcase the kinds of topics that are fairly unique to TED as a discussion site rather than questions that might be posed or asked at myriad discussion or chat areas on the internet, like sharing of personal tastes and habits. I would not feature questions/discussions in which the course of them is highly predictable or that involve one right answer.

    Ultimately it is about curatorial judgment as to what is likely to be most interesting for a TED audience.
    • thumb
      Jun 3 2013: Fritzie Hi
      I agree with your ideas of choosing a subject.

      The next part deals with who will choose? My suggestion is as follows.

      . A group of TED administrators, speakers and featured candidates will evaluate the conversation.
  • thumb
    Jun 3 2013: adesh, where are these featured articles, or is this a new feature you're proposing?
    • thumb
      Jun 3 2013: Hi Greg

      TED publishes conversations under following headings

      Featured .... Recently added ... Most active ... Ending soon ... Ended

      My focus is on featured conversations
      • thumb
        Jun 3 2013: Oh, yeah, you're talking about conversations, not articles, right? I believe you should re-write your explanation above, adesh, it made me think there were printed articles on TED.

        I don't know, have you ever asked TED how they choose the featured conversations, you can write to them and ask questions like that, and they usually write back. I imagine it's random, a computer just does it, but I'm not sure. Personally I ignore it, I just go to the three categories, ideas, questions, and debates, and read the new ones at the top and see if they intrigue me. I believe I'll write to TED and ask your question and get back to you with the answer. Or you do it. I believe the email address is

        You can always ask them also why they reject a conversation. When they reject mine they send a form rejection, a standard form, but I usually write back and ask them to give me better reasons, and in that case a live person always writes me back and tells me their thinking, it's usually Morton Bast. The email address is the same. Usually after I hear their reasons I still disagree, but ultimately they win because it's their website.
        • thumb
          Jun 3 2013: Thanks Greg

          I have re- written the explanation

          I raised the same question at with no reply. pl do write to TED and ask for us.

          I believe TED needs more transparency and established criteria for featured conversations . Criterias should be laid down and published for every one to see, like they do with featured articles on Wikipedia.
      • thumb
        Jun 3 2013: Thank you, Mr. S. Yes, I believe the address is conversations with an "s" at the end, your email may not go through. Yes, I did write, and I got a reply from Morton Bast, he said I am wrong about the random computer, that in fact the featured conversations are editorially chosen. If you want to know how they choose them, you or I should write him and ask. I'd sort of guess that it depends on the mood of the person choosing them that day, some days they may be looking for intelligent ones, some days funny ones, some days they'll choose one that hasn't gotten many posts, some days they'll choose a popular one, maybe one that has to do with events in the news. You know, adesh, like that. To me, I usually don't care because I check TED every day, I'm more interested in the new ones at the top of each category. I guess they could publish how they choose, like I say I believe we can make a pretty good guess, I expect Morton chooses them, and he's a nice, intelligent, pleasant man.

        I'm glad you asked this question, I learned something, and it's good to think about how the site you're talking on works.
        • thumb
          Jun 3 2013: I thought it was an algorithm! Because I noticed that my conversation was moving up and down according to the participation. Perhaps they manually choose article and let algorithms sort them. Didn't know that, interesting...
  • Jun 2 2013: I don't know about that aspect of TED yet. I did however write the Wikipedia definition of the "digital revolution" which lasted about four months a few years back before some blither head asked for sources and they turned it into something so useless and off the mark IMO that I never bothered getting involved again. If I lived the revolution and journalized it for 30 years, why do I need to quote anyone else? The truth is finite. And one can know it without "looking it up" from someone else's interpretation. I was fine with being challenged on any point of substance as to whether I had it wrong or was unfair or biased, but to be dismissed entirely because I didn't provide sources is just old fashioned academic conventional wisdom proving itself to need updating. Anyway, at least for fourth months I was the Wiki authority on what the digital revolution entails. That and $4 will get me a latte.
    • thumb
      Jun 3 2013: When you wrote the article, James, did you say what your qualifications were? Or is there an opportunity to do that?
      • Jun 3 2013: Sorry Greg, I don't recall. It was quite a while ago. The issue though is not who I am, it is whether there was anything substantially wrong with the definition. Every bit of information that human beings put into sentences can't say everything at once. The nature of communications is that we have to "lineate" information into a "stream" and make editorial decisions the best we can and try to make it add up to something when read. The person reading must go through the linearity of reading and "de-lineating" MEANING--i.e. turning the "stream" back into dynamic concepts that can be considered through personal view of relevancies. That makes every written explanation subject to criticism--indeed there are no perfect expressions that will last forever of many things. And unfortunately, when we're talking about something that is still unfolding, and in truth, may not even yet have begun (there is so much more to the "revolution" than the "evolution" of technology that still has to be interpreted and reflected in social, economic, ecological and political change, that it is arguable that the "revolution" has only just started. Indeed the model of education still in place is rooted in the Industrial Revolution and the "Factory Model" system, not a "Digital Revolution" re-thinking of what education should be for the next century or more.) So why dismiss out of hand something for which there are few sources and all subjective? What would it matter how much achievement I had made in the "factory" system if the more steeped in it you are, the less open-minded you might be to finding its flaws and arguing for its redesign? This is but one of the many paradoxes at play and why IMO the "revolution" is barely under way--it's a revolution in reverse where we have achieved power we don't yet have uses for as opposed to seeking power we've been denied. IMO, this won't be a "revolution" until it is "led" to sustain fundamental change like a wholly new educational paradigm.
  • Jun 2 2013: There are playlists for videos. Perhaps there should be a preserved collection list of the best discussions and answers under very general subjects headings.

    Perhaps you have an SME moderator and then consider the number of likes and limit the number to top 20 in an area at any given time. Perhaps for those that are on this list, the duration of the discussion should be extended from 30 days to 60, 90 etc. or until a discussion is bumped from the list by another. This would enable someone wanting to see the best thoughts in a particular subject at a snapshot at any given time.

    This is a good question..perhaps one of the TED administrators should take note.