On 03/10/06, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
I think this is true of most rules and a good reason
to *avoid* coming up with a rigid rule to catch
hoaxes. They key is to find them quickly. I think
en.WP generally does a good job of this. I imagine
they patrol articles much more effectively than other
communities. (Or else a ten-month old hoax would get
a more matter-of-fact recation)
Ten months is pretty extreme by en.wp hoax standards - three months is
the usual top of the range before it gets caught by someone, IME.
I think the key is
finding a way to identify "high-risk" articles. If we
could manage to ggenerate a list of month-old articles
sorted by least number of edits, and keep it low
profile. It may be enought to do a second round of
"patrols" off such a list. Although that doesn't help
with any currently existing hoaxes.
Something like Special:Unwatchedpages on en.wp - visible to admins
only? It's worth a try...
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk