Maybe a weird suggestion, but you could of course look at the Dutch Wikipedia how they are doing things. As you might recall, nlwikipedia is one of the few, and at least the largest Wikimedia projects using MarkAsPatrolled. Which is, to some extent, similar (also about flagging, but not so much versions, but changes). There are a few systems and tools in use that might appear to be handy in dewiki as well.
BR, Lodewijk
2008/5/8, Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com:
2008/5/8 Magnus Manske magnusmanske@googlemail.com:
I think Lars calls FlaggedRevs "soft locking" and doesn't want to apply it on a large scale.
IMHO FlaggedRevs are much different from protection/locking. The purpose of FlaggedRevs is to present the uninitiated audience with a vandalism-free Wikipedia. Applying FlaggedRevs to only a few pages will not achieve that.
I think Lars' worry is (partly) a matter of update rates leading to locking-through-inertia.
Yes, we can purge through all existing pages and set a flag on them - indeed, it's an excellent opportunity to do so, and it means that hopefully all pages will get eyeballed to make them clean.
But! What happens next? If I go off and update a short article (one which no-one has watchlisted, etc) on de.wp, what mechanism is in place to flag *that* revision? Is it possible that on non-high-traffic pages, an "old" revision could remain the newest flagged one for weeks, months, despite having been superceded?
I can see how this would have the effect of soft-locking - I'd really like to know how we plan to get round it.
Automatically generated reports of all pages with the most recent edit "unflagged", sorted by age, perhaps? This'd allow the permitted users to knock off a few each a day, keep it churning over. The sort of thing that would appeal to inveterate RC patrollers ;-)
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l