2009/9/26 David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com>om>:
2009/9/26 Thomas Dalton
<thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com>om>:
I think we should have flagged revs for as many
articles as we can
keep up-to-date with. If it takes more than 5 minutes (preferably 1
minute) to review an edit (except for occasional times when somehow a
backlog builds up and it takes a few minutes for people to realise and
work through it), then we have failed. If we can have every single
article on flagged revs and still keep on top of them, then we should
do that. If we can't, then we should keep it to just a small number of
articles that really need it.
de:wp manages about one third in the first hour. That's really not
enough unless there's sone urgent need to stop Wikipedia newbie
editing dead.
No, IMO they have failed. It should be literally 100% of edits reviews
in 5 minutes the vast majority of the time. I would set a target of
the lag on Special:OldReviewedPages should be less than 5 minutes 99%
of the time. If we fail to reach that target, we need to reduce the
number of articles we are using the extension on. I really think that
is achievable though, even with every article included - we already
have RC-patrollers checking most edits within a few minutes and this
extension would make it much easier to avoid duplicate effort. Do any
of the vandal-fighter tools (like Huggle) handle working through the
OldReviewedPages in order? (We need New Page patrollers to make sure
every new page gets its first review very quickly - they are usually
good at keeping on top of new pages.)