On 03/10/06, Jake Waskett <jake(a)waskett.org> wrote:
On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 15:39 +0100, David Gerard
> On 03/10/06, Jake Waskett <jake(a)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
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.)