Yann Forget a écrit:
Le Monday 23 May 2005 13:24, Anthere a écrit :
>Yann Forget a écrit:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Le Sunday 22 May 2005 17:05, Magnus Manske a écrit :
> >>David Gerard schrieb:
> >>>I suggest that we allow ratings by anonymous users (IP numbers), at
>
>>least in 1.5.
>
> >>>
> >>>Reasons for this:
> >>>
> >>>* we've always worked by leaving things as open as possible and only
> >>> restricting as needed;
> >>>
> >>>* we're explicitly not using the data for anything important yet,
so if
> >>>ten thousand rating spammers put
[[Image:Autofellatio.jpg]] top
>
>marks for
>
> >>>everything, it won't actually affect anything;
> >>>
> >>>* the raw data will be of great interest to people, and as wide as
> >>>possible is good. (I can see the academics studying Wikipedia
slavering
> >>>for the ratings data tarball ;-)
> >>
> >>Two reasons against this:
> >>
> >>* Later, we will allow only logged-in users to rate articles, right?
> >>Otherwise, we'll lose a great part of the perceived reliability
> >>improvement, IMHO. But how can we really set up this system if the
data
we use as a
foundation for the decision is based on anon entries as
well?
I think it better if only logged in users can validate articles.
But well it depend what we want to do with this feature: selecting
articles
for an offline publication or studying psychology and sociology of
Wikipedia readers ?
We have a precedent: only logged in users can upload images.
This is not the same.
Uploading images is a way to improve the quality of the project. We had
to put restrictions to limit vandalism.
For me this is the same. Validating articles is a way to improve the
quality
of the project.
Okay; But then if we do not allow readers to rate articles, we could
find a way to allow their feedback to be taken into account. Ant