Page history shows the revision text with current templates/images. Making exceptions for
this would confuse people more, especially when trying to revert to an old version (the
templates/images would be mysteriously older). Most readers don't go through the
history, so this doesn't matter much. What I don't want to do is break the way
history works for certain exceptions, which will greatly annoy editors :/
When you say:
ii) If current is stable, show the stable text, but the last image and the last sighted
template.
I'm not quite sure what you mean here. So when stable = current what would you like
shown when:
a) viewing the default version (no "stable=" in the url)
b) viewing the stable version (&stable=1)
c) viewing the current version (&stable=0)
-Aaron Schulz
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 21:10:57 +0200
From: pbirken(a)gmail.com
To: wikiquality-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikiquality-l] Reverts
Some thoughts:
One thing that did surely confused me was that the version history
does not provide you with stable versions, but was so far left
untouched. This means that for example that although a version in the
history is marked as sighted
(
http://wikixp.org/qa/index.php5?title=Berlin&action=history)ory),
clicking on such a version does not provide you with the stable
version. Furthermore, when seeing such a version, the GUI is not
shown. I think that showing the stable versions when possible would be
much better. And more appropriate anyhow since currently, all
templates are shown in their current versions instead of how they were
when that version was created. Showing stable versions solves at least
that problem.
The next question is, how much do we want to sacrifice for templates?
I ask this because we are in the revert-thread here: automatic reverts
are an essential tool for vandalism-fighting. However, as its
automatic, people can't check the changes in templates. Thus,
vandalism in templates can be transported in stable versions. So,
what's worth more? Fast reverts or 100% accuracy in templates?
Personally, I chose the first one.
All in all, I still think that the original idea is best:
i) Stable versions are defined as now (with templates and images as
they were when created), but
ii) If current is stable, show the stable text, but the last image and
the last sighted template.
Chosing then the appropriate text for the box is IMHO a solvable
problem, but all in all this is the most intriguing solution as is
still allows templates to change in current versions, but blocks most
of the vandalism in templates.
Bye,
Philipp
_______________________________________________
Wikiquality-l mailing list
Wikiquality-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiquality-l
_________________________________________________________________
Climb to the top of the charts! Play Star Shuffle: the word scramble challenge with star
power.