David Gerard wrote:
Anthere (anthere9@yahoo.com) [050522 01:22]:
It's editorial work on the project like any other. How good you are with ratings is as much part of your reputation as how good you are with edits. I don't see any reason *not* to make it as public as any other editorial work.
Indeed, since a key factor regarding how I would treat a rating or review is the reputation of the reviewer I think it's _necessary_ to keep track of these sorts of things. This isn't like scientific peer review where one at least has a reasonable guarantee that the reviewers know the subject matter; any J. Random Yahoo could be doing the rating in this case (I'm assuming it'll be pretty open or it won't scale well). People could also wind up rating their own work, which should be noted.
On the other hand, we don't make watchlists public so giving a list of all reviewed articles might not be a good idea. Maybe just make reviews show up in user contributions along with other edits, so recent work is theoretically available for checking but it slides off over the horizon of history after a while.