Just queue new articles so they have to go via an admin before joining the main namespace

The suggestion was to have a constant patrol, and process everything very quickly. If you want to do this it should be enforced. Any mechanism where things have to go through some form of category change say is better than just hoping things dont get missed, and lets you avoid the situation of not knowing what someone else has reviewed. Doesnt have to be done by admins, although vandals might work it out pretty quickly if they could sign off their own new articles.

On Thu, 2005-12-01 at 17:10 +0000, David Gerard wrote: Unworkable - who knows when they can do it.

Just queue new articles so they have to go via an admin before joining the main namespace (they can sit in New: before that). Not much code.

On 12/1/05, Daniel Mayer <maveric149(a)yahoo.com> wrote: This "trust network" sounds not entirely different to the whitelist on CDVF. It shouldn't be too difficult to create a shared whitelist that members of a specified group can all use and add to. Multiple lists could be created and you could subscribe to as many as you like and that the members accept you. This sounds eminently possible to me, if a fair bit of work. Do people with some technical knowledge have an idea if it is possible? -- Sam

On 12/1/05, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote: Yep, a lot of the vandalism is from anons. I personally would never whitelist anons, as that just isn't reliable. But with a whitelist you cut out all the users who do make good edits, meaning you don't have to check them. All the sharing does beyond what already exists is optimises it for use by many people. Of course, not everyone should use this system. Any universally-used system has loop-holes. Having numerous systems means the loopholes disappear, or at least become insignificant. I'm sure there *are* loopholes, but I haven't seen them yet. Care to expand?

On 12/1/05, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote: That's a problem inherent in allowing anonymous edits, I suppose. My suggestion about common whitelists and also some kind of edit validation would make this work in general. Add semi-protection to most-vandalised articles and I think the strain of RC patrol would be considerably cut.

On 12/1/05, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote: If every edit is getting checked (which is by no means a pipe dream) then that won't be a problem.

By the way, could you run spell-check on your mailing-list posts? It's somewhat distracting when you're a pedant and this isn't a wiki... -- Sam

What we need are teams of people working together in a way that minimizes duplicated effort. As is, there is no way to know if a diff has been looked at once before, never before, or 200 times. There is also no way to know what was being looked at (simple vandalism, subtle vandalism, accuracy, etc). Knowing at least the first part (how many times a diff has been looked at) will help a great deal. Sorting RC based on that would be even better. Better still would be to sort RC and similar lists based on trust networks. For example, I trust you and many other people. So edits either made by you and diffs checked by you should be OK in my eyes. It would be nice if my RC and similar lists de-emphasized your edits and edits checked by you. This could go one step farther: I trust your ability to judge whether or not other people are trustworthy. So it would be nice if I could trust by proxy all the users you trust. This creates a trust network. This could also be done P2P via an offline editor and thus minimize server load. The offline editor would do all the sorting after downloading raw data from Wikipedia. I think it is obvious that we need bigger and better guns to fight vandals. -- mav

Daniel Mayer wrote: I don't know if "Mark as patrolled" is currently switched on ... it does help doing RC on Uncyclopedia. - d.

On 12/1/05, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote: It could, however, be made to work if it were integrated into the IRC feeds and made to work with CDVF. I think there would have to be some bueaucracy with it, though. There would have to be a level of user (I know this is already programmed in) that can mark edits as patrolled, and this would have to be separately granted. It would just need a little evidence of vandal fighting, just so the simple vandals can't get in. This doesn't seem unreasonable if it were to be programmed. -- Sam

The answer is pretty obvious in that more diverse ways of sorting RC for different uses. People can get organized all they want, but its pointless to do without the tools to handle the massive numbers. Watchlists only work for hardcore users, and even then it can be a pain, when you find you inflexible it is. (Multiple watchlists would be nice... [1],[2],[3],[4]...). The sorting by all available namespaces, doesnt really help sorting out the "too much data" problem because 98 percent of the "vandalism" is in the Main namespace -- ie. articles. The sort RC by anon or logged-in users is useful, but its only a one-trick pony (in two different ways), because its only useful for RC patrolling, and does so focusing only on IPs (who happen to make up 20 percent of WP's contributors). The answer seems like it will be some kind of fine-tuned context-subject sorting, based on the Category scheme. So people can sort RC by SUBJECT OF INTEREST, rather than by an abstract data quantity like login/IP/namespace etc. It's got to be harder to do, as it draws from a user-defined list of categories. There will no doubt be overlap, etc. (Has noone tried to graphically map wikipedia by the way?) I wonder if the Wikipedia:TOC couldnt just be replicated with Related Changes links instead of Cat links. Someone with sysop privs could even stick that at the top of the main RC.... Stevertigo --- geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote: mark It page. http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l __________________________________________ Yahoo! DSL – Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less. dsl.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l