I thought simple was going to get shut down. Of course, it could still be used as a guinea pig for new features, but I didn't realise that there is still interest in reviving it.

geni wrote: If that is its only use, then doing so isn't productive. :-p

On 11/5/05, Alphax <alphasigmax(a)gmail.com> wrote: Yes from what I recall between 3 and 6 is pretty quite on that day. -- geni

On 05/11/05, Alphax <alphasigmax(a)gmail.com> wrote: http://noc.wikimedia.org/stats.php Times appear to be given in UTC, judging by "Last updated" being only a couple of hours behind current UTC time - it looks like load is lowest around 0000 to 0600 UTC on Saturdays and Sundays, with Saturday generally being a quiet day. So all things considered, 3am Saturday morning looks good ;-) -- - Andrew Gray andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Magnus Manske wrote: The servers just went slow, did you turn it on? :) - -- Alphax | /"\ Encrypted Email Preferred | \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613 | X Against HTML email & vCards http://tinyurl.com/cc9up | / \

Magnus Manske wrote: Aww. So once again, we go right up to the brink and then back off? Throw ze svitch!

Alphax wrote: Go for it. -- Neil

-----Original Message----- From: Stefan Sittler [mailto:kiaparowits@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, 7 November 2005 3:34 AM To: English Wikipedia Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Try out the rating scheme Be bold! --Cyberjunkie

Yes, of course that is the problem. There are several developers who could enable the feature, but all of them are now in fear that something will go Horribly Wrong™, so each individual one of them doesn't want to be held responsible in the end, so they don't do it and hope that someone else will do it and take the blame instead. Which is kind of weird, because Brion and Tim have done much more "dangerous" things in the past, and every once in a while it does bring the servers down, but they always fix it swiftly and it's never a big deal. This wouldn't be any different, had it not been for the initial FUD-laden discussion, which now leaves the developers fearful of social repercussions. Timwi

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 geni wrote: I think you meant "non-wikimedia" - given that we're talking about features of Mediawiki... Actually, given the number of customisations that have been carried out to our wikis, I'm not entirely sure that the results would be valid. We need the exact same conditions with only 1 variable changed (the presence of the validation feature) for the results to be valid in any way. Given that Commons has traditionally been a place of innovation and trying out new features, why not start there? - -- Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia "We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 geni wrote: <snip> I was thinking more in terms of "given the number of extensions that have already been applied, will adding validation break them, be broken by them, or cause the whole thing to crash?" However I am reasonably certain that the devs have made sure this is not the case. What I'm not convinced about is the complex server structure... Actually that was a pretty stupid statement of me to make. Commons has done quite a few things wrt. multilingualism (cf. Babel) but in terms of actually getting content out there and available, de: has been the leader (cf. the DVD and such). So: should we ask the de: community what they think? Try it out over there? - -- Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia "We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales

On 09/11/05, geni &lt;geniice(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: Without meaning to sound Eurocentric - how easy is it for the .ko community to get back to the developers with problems? AIUI we're used to "experimental" work happening with .en, but not elsewhere... Huh. Wait a second. We've already said, somewhere upthread, that the test implementation of the feature is solely to gather information on how it works. So why not enable it on meta and see what happens? Ratings will be meaningless, sure (though possibly amusing), but it lets people play with it, it lets us see if it works, and when whatever machine meta is on fails to explode into a ball of flaming debris then we can roll it out somewhere people might actually see it and rate articles "for real"... -- - Andrew Gray andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk

Alphax wrote: Wikimedia has no test servers? All of them are production systems?

On 11/9/05, Andrew Venier &lt;avenier(a)venier.net&gt; wrote: The code has already been tested in such a fashion - the question is whether it can stand a production load. Perhaps the true problem is that we do not have any method of simulating a production load adequately. -Matt

On 11/8/05, geni &lt;geniice(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: I would invite you to do it on WikiTree (wikitree.org), but we're still running 1.4 and my developer status (while promised) has not happened yet. -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Wikiacc

Wikiacc wrote: Any word on whether he's interested? I'm hoping this isn't going to just slip away into forgotten-land again. Just earlier today I had yet another conversation with someone online in which they said "Wikipedia's nice and all, but you can never tell if someone's just inserted a load of nonsense into it." With this feature I'd finally have a snappy comeback to that. And having just dipped my toes into AfD for a few days, I'd love to see anything that might alleviate it. :)