On 12/8/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Being able to change the author column would help,
but I could still see problems.
How would you avoid people crediting others for edits they didn't make
or suggest?
It's not really that horrible to have a few spurious authorship lines
here and there. I'd much rather have a few extra than a few missing.
Anyway, you'd avoid it by reverting the edits which do so.
I don't say the system is magic, but I think it's a lot better than
what we have now (and it'd be in addition to what we have now anyway).
Also, some people are inherently lazy and still
won't proper attribute
something even if there's an easy way to do so. Proof is in the fact
people fail to listen to multiple clear instructions on both the help-
and reference desk which are explained and should make sense.
Right. It's not perfect. Just better. At least if someone is lazy
and doesn't attribute something and then someone else catches them, it
can be fixed.
If we added a "references" field to the edit page, even if it was
optional, the number of attributions would probably increase even
more. The field would be unformatted, so someone could of course type
"I just knew it" or "copied from some website" or even
"poop" for
their reference, but it'd be one more thing to look into if someone
put their reference as "Wikipedia". Remember, one of the reasons
academics and publishers are so tough on references is to avoid
plagiarism. If someone can check your reference and see that the
information you added is in that source, then there's much less of a
chance you just copy-pasted it (to use the electronic version) from
some other place.
Any idea on how to avoid such problems. Re-educating
users would safe
coders a lot of work, not to mention another scheduled downtime to
upgrade databases like when the current id was being changed so diffs
to the latest version could remain static.
Mgfm
Hmm, the way I see it it'd be a relatively simple feature, and
wouldn't require any changes to the database. Just add a namespace
called History, put a link to it next to Talk, and put some code in
the software to automatically edit the History page whenever the
article gets edited. The database wouldn't change at all.
Now, adding a references section would preferably add a column to a
database table. Whether or not that would require scheduled downtime,
I don't know. The last version of MySQL I used was pretty crappy when
it comes to altering tables on the fly. There are ways to do it in
MySQL, but it takes a little bit of thinking and good design.
Scheduled downtime should be unacceptable on a site this big;
unfortunately it isn't. (BTW, it's trivial to alter tables, on a live
database, without downtime, in PostgreSQL. And I say this as someone
who personally prefers MySQL, so it's not just advocacy.)
On 12/8/05, Anthony DiPierro
<wikilegal(a)inbox.org> wrote:
On 12/8/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm
<macgyvermagic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
We have the same problem with merges.
Some people don't seem to think it's neccesary to attribute material
to the original article and author when merging something. I'm not
even sure of a majority of them actually say it's a merge in the
summary.
That really needs to change.
Mgm
It certainly won't change until there's a solution which actually
makes sense, such as an editable history section like I suggested.
Putting authorship information in the comment column, and not in the
authorship column? I can see why people don't do that, it doesn't
make any sense.
On 12/8/05, Anthony DiPierro
<wikilegal(a)inbox.org> wrote:
On 12/8/05, Jim <trodel(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/8/05, Anthony DiPierro <wikilegal(a)inbox.org> wrote:
> > On 12/8/05, Anthere <anthere9(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > We may pretend it does not matter at all; but the truth is that most
> > > authors are proud of their work. And it is hard to be striped of
one's
> > > authorship. If it were not true, we would not be so numerous to list
> > > articles we wrote.
> > >
> > We should add an *editable* history section. Call it the history
> > namespace. Put a link to it next to the link to the talk page.
> > Automatically add a username to it when the user edits a page (at
> > least if they are making a new edit for the year), and manually add a
> > username to it when text is copied.
>
>
> It seems to me that this could be resolved by properly referencing the
> source of the material in the summary. For example, copied from WP:AFC
> request per [[User:ip.add.res.s]]. And editors should be instructed when
> copying information from one article to another - to put the version of the
> source article just prior to the cut in the target article summary.
>
> This would point them to the article before the cut and reference the
> authors that created the source article up until then.
This would work relatively OK if everyone did it correctly and
consistently 100% of the time. Which is to say, we've already tried
this, it doesn't work.
As for Ant's particular problem, one could suggest that she simply
make some minor edit to the text, and thus her name will then show up
as an author. But that's kind of a kludge, and someone looking at the
actual diffs would get the wrong impression as to what she was the
author of. It also doesn't address the GFDL requirement to include
the title of the work (the title at the time it was edited), if a page
is moved, and it makes the list of authors way too long and awkward
(we don't need to list the same author more than once per year, in
fact in my opinion there should only be one line in the history
section per year, listing all the authors, unless the title changes or
there is a merger from a different work in which case you'd want one
line per title).
Anthony
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l