On 12/14/05, Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com wrote:
A lot of IP users add or remove something, and then immediately revert it. I quite often rollback these - even though there's overall no change - simply so that people don't waste time looking at the diff. Never sure if it helps or not, but...
That's a good idea, but I don't think it works -- the software won't accept an edit of nothing, and your "edit" won't show up in the history. That's my experience at least.
Nathaniel (Spangineer)
On 14/12/05, Tom Cadden thomcadden@yahoo.ie wrote:
Right now, because we don't know who has checked what stuff some stuff is being checked to death, while other articles are not being
checked
at all. It would be a big help if we could spot the checked and
unchecked
articles and so focus our attentions on those that need a check.
Incidentally, my understanding is that CDVF (which I must play with) handles this okayish; it tags individual diffs as looked at or not.
This is especially a problem with watchlists. I log on, glance down the watchlist from the previous night... hmm. There's an eight-hour old edit to [[Liberalism]]; it won't be vandalism, since a dozen eyes will have checked it, but there's a forty-minute old one to [[Neil Armstrong]] that probably is. And these normally safe assumptions are what leads to us losing three quarters of a page for a week every now and again...
--
- Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
-- Nathaniel C. Sheetz http://www.personal.psu.edu/ncs124