On 06/09/05, Poor, Edmund W Edmund.W.Poor@abc.com wrote:
RC patrollers might like to know WHO has reviewed a version. If Mav says he's checked the diff for "simple vandalism", I wouldn't give it a second thought. He's the champ. He used to check EVERY change (!) when traffic was slow enough. Now that there are often 100s of edits per minute, this work needs to be split up. I would be happy to put in an hour, from time to time, if only I knew "who else" had certified a certain article version as "patrolled". I'd ignore known troublemakers, for example. Double check newbies, and not even bother reviewing the work of people I come to trust.
I haven't used it, but doesn't CDVF allow this functionality to some degree, with whitelisting &c?
For the looming print version (or CD / DVD version), we could automatically choose article versions which have a suitable combination of Approval Tags and Problem tags. (My own preference would be "patrolled" and no "graffiti".) A library might insist on "accurate" and "balanced" with no "inaccurate" or "bias".
Note that, thanks to transclusion, "no graffiti" does not mean it doesn't have giant images of penises stuck everwhere across it...