On 03/10/06, Jake Waskett jake@waskett.org wrote:
On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 15:39 +0100, David Gerard wrote:
On 03/10/06, Jake Waskett jake@waskett.org wrote:
On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 15:23 +0100, David Gerard wrote:
The bot would have to be semi-auto, i.e. a human would have to look over the result.
What makes you say that?
(a) people will be happier if there's a human pressing the button (b)
Hmm. How about using a custom template, as Carl essentially suggested, and in addition, make sure that this template explicitly states what has happened and that it will be reviewed in due course. Also append a suitable category so that it's very easy for volunteers to find and review these articles. Is transparency a good-enough solution?
Maybe. But if we're going to bother, semi-auto is just fine IMO. Also, if it's something
(I'm busy working out how I can do this, and arrange to do it.)
- d.