--- Toby Bartels <toby+wikipedia(a)math.ucr.edu> wrote:
Anthere wrote in part:
I support system that could automatically detect
a
potential problem.
It is very likely that
- one user/ip saving every minute for more than 10
mn
is a potential problem
- any edit replacing more than xxxx characters by x
characters (except redirect...) is a potential
problem
- any edit replacing more than xxxx characters by
an
image that was downloaded less than tt minutes
before
is a potential problem
But, then, what good would it do, if an automatic
system detect a potential problem but has no human
to
warn ?
OK, here's an idea:
We should develop (on [[m:]]) a Bayesian vandal
detector.
We'll implement this detector (or versions of it) on
every wiki,
and set up a mailing list of militia members to be
warned
when the detector suspects vandalism.
The catch is, the mailing list is international.
So if there's vandalism on [[fr:]],
then I can learn about it and respond to it
during the time that I'm online,
even if none of the French speakers are online then.
(Of course, I need to know a little French to do
this,
so I can list the languages that I know a little of
when I sign up for the mailing list,
lest I get warnings about vandalism on [[zh:]]
that I can't safely do anything about.)
This seems like all good ideas to me. Now, the tough
point is how to detect mostly vandalism, but not
confuse good users with vandals...
Mav said
Seems like a good set of ideas to me. Under a
multilanguage >Phase IV,
Very likely yes
however, wouldn't it be a good idea to have sysops
be
sysops >for all languages?
If this were the case I would pop into several
different >languages periodically
to check for obvious
vandalism.
En.wiki has sysops watching it 20-24 hours a day so
if en.wiki >sysops popped in to check various other
languages periodically >(esp. during the no, or slow
edit times you talk about) then >that should provide
better coverage against the most blatant >goat sex
type vandalism and vandal bots.
That's a tough point really.
Theoretically, it sounds natural that somebody trusted
for one wiki should be trusted on another (though, to
be honest...I am not convinced myself).
Practically, that's could be a problem unfortunately.
The english wiki process while deciding who should be
a sysop or not is done through peer review (general
behavior, respect to the community standards...). But,
communities don't have the same standards, and what is
ok on one could be hardly tolerable on another. And
the tobe-sysop being not known, how would it be ok to
accept somebody you don't know (say would you blindly
accept Shaihulud as a sysop ?), while you reject
somebody you know, just on the behalf he is refusing
to change his name ?
I know you Mav, so I would say "yes, please, come and
help us", and I thank you very much for your
proposition. But why would other french agree for
somebody they don't know to have more admin "power"
than they have ?
Btw, didnot tmc changed his name as the community was
'kindly' asking him ?
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus � Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com