While I'm hovering dangerously close to instruction creep by suggesting it, I think there should be some sort of mini-review process where instead of automatically resetting the rating, an admin has to look at it first (i.e., there would have to be a reason given for clearing the rating). This would especially be the case for an FA where it had around 1,000 votes (i.e., consensus).
Also, there should either be a minimum threshold for rating (e.g., 10 votes to be eligible for GA, 20 for FA) or a system where the max rating is unavailable until x votes (e.g., on a 10-point scale, the max could increment by .5 on the scale, maxing at 20 votes, with fixed thresholds for GA and FA). If such a system were not in place, then an article could hit FA status with only one vote.
Carl
On 9/12/06, Phil Sandifer Snowspinner@gmail.com wrote:
On Sep 12, 2006, at 9:44 AM, maru dubshinki wrote:
Impossible. Featured articles are determined by FAC, which is as ridden or more so with politics as AFD, DRV, and other such eyesores: standards are constantly shifting and unevenly applied. Good Articles itself has turned into a mockery of FAC.
Most Featured Articles are great articles, but most great articles are not FAs.
The usual solution in these cases would be to create a lightweight, no bureaucracy version, akin to PROD. Article rating was a nice technical solution that had a few major bugs like not actually working, but what if we strayed away from version rating and had general ratings on articles? i.e. instead of the database nightmare just let articles all have 1-5 ratings, with some option like "if ten people vote to clear ratings, the ratings are reset" so as to not have articles sandbagged with ratings of ancient versions?
-Phil _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l