At no.wp we are running a system for patrolling, whereby a user marks a
revision as patrolled. This uses the old patrolling solution, and some
added roles. It works pretty well as a simplyfied flaggedrevs.
John
Luca de Alfaro skrev:
By the way:
It is easy for us to add a mechanism so that when one flags a revision
in flaggedrevs, the trust of the revision increases, similarly (pehaps
a bit less? we can discuss) as when there is an edit.
Originally the difficulty in doing this was that someone could click
on "sighted" a lot of times, thus increasing too much the trust of a
revision -- additional clicks by the same author on the same revision
should not cause additional trust.
In the latest version of the code, this has been solved, as we keep
track who has caused the trust of the text to raise, and we can
discard duplicate clicks.
So if there is concrete interest from a wiki that has flaggedrevs
running, and wants to deploy wikitrust, we can make sure the two
extensions work together well. The only reason we have not
implemented this yet is that I wanted to know more about the concrete
interest. Let me know!
Luca
On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 11:11 AM, mike.lifeguard
<mike.lifeguard(a)gmail.com <mailto:mike.lifeguard@gmail.com>> wrote:
I agree - this is why I think using both an implicit method (trust
colouring) *and* an explicit method (flaggedrevs) together will be
best for
small/slow projects like English Wikibooks etc.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: wikiquality-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org
<mailto:wikiquality-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org>
[mailto:wikiquality-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org
<mailto:wikiquality-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org>] On Behalf Of
John Erling
Blad
Sent: September 1, 2008 12:43 PM
To: Wikimedia Quality Discussions
Subject: Re: [Wikiquality-l] WikiTrust v2 released: reputation and
trustforyour wiki in real-time!
Jusrt drop a note and I'll post a notice on our signpost.
I think it is valuable as a clue as to whats going on in an
article, but
I also believe it will be circumstances where it might give a false
impression of thrustwortyness.
Lets see what people say if they have an example and can see for them
selves! :D
John
Luca de Alfaro skrev:
I tend to think that this may not be a huge
problem... but "the
proof
is in the pudding": our server is now up and
running, we are
experimenting with some wikis, why don't we try to color a dump
of the
Norwegian wikipedia and see how the result looks
like? I am sure it
won't be perfect, and the reasons you cite are the reasons why the
tool actually never displays people's reputation value (we don't
want
visitors to read too much into it). But perhaps
the tool will still
enable the easy visual detection of recent changes, and unvalidated
changes, and perhaps contributors will find this useful.
I downloaded the latest dump I could find (June 2008), and I will
color it right away.
I am not sure we will install all the extensions required for it to
look pretty, and images may or may not work, so this will be a
purely
experimental setting (all of these things would
work if we
colored the
real Norwegian Wikipedia, it's just that I am
not sure I can
find the
time in these days to install all required
extensions). Still, it
will give you an idea.
(I haven't implemented yet the code to bring up to date the trust of
long-unchanged pages; I will do it).
Luca
2008/8/31 John Erling Blad <john.erling.blad(a)jeb.no
<mailto:john.erling.blad@jeb.no>
<mailto:john.erling.blad@jeb.no
<mailto:john.erling.blad@jeb.no>>>
At no.wp there are now questions about establishing thrust
for users
within small or closed groups where it is no
or very little
knowledge
outside the group. Such situations will occur
very rarely on
english, or
one of the other large wikis, yet it can occur very easily
on smaller
communities. It can although happen on a wiki
with a large
community if
the given area of knowledge is sufficiently small.
An example is something like tetraploid salmon in fish farming
(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fish_farming), where the english
community
might be able to check if this is meaningful and parhaps
also the
norwegian community, irish community and
chilean community,
but what
about the polish community? Will they figure
out the
relations? Will a
editor writing about this gain correct trust?
Note that the
places are
known for salmon fish farming, someone in the
polish community
might now
about this because there are fish farming in Poland - just not
with salmon.
I believe the system in the mean will produce valuable
information, but
it will not be very accurate without additional measures.
John
_______________________________________________
Wikiquality-l mailing list
Wikiquality-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
<mailto:Wikiquality-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
<mailto:Wikiquality-l@lists.wikimedia.org
<mailto:Wikiquality-l@lists.wikimedia.org>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Wikiquality-l mailing list
Wikiquality-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
<mailto:Wikiquality-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
_______________________________________________
Wikiquality-l mailing list
Wikiquality-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
<mailto:Wikiquality-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiquality-l
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Wikiquality-l mailing list
Wikiquality-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiquality-l