--- Magnus Manske <magnus.manske(a)web.de> wrote:
To give maximum choice, I have just written a new
MediaWiki extension
which allows for *one* revision of an article to be declared "stable".
Yay! You rock! :)
A select group of users can declare an article version
as "stable". In
the default setup, the "select group" is everyone, but that would have
to be tightly restricted in an live setup. For this purpose, I propose
the creation of a new user group, like buerocrats and sysops, called
"prozacs" - after all, they are supposed to stabelize the wiki ;-)
.
There is a problem with templates; even a stable version will use new
templates. I do not have a neat soultion for that, except generally
limiting write access to templates. However, misinformation through a
template will be hard to achieve anyway, compared to directly editing
article; also, template changes will be noticed rather quickly.
Why not just copy the source HTML of a reference stable revision at the time of marking
and serve
that? That way whatever was in the template at the time of the snapshot will be displayed
as the
stable HTML copy.
This complements the validation feature and the
external "import-wiki".
Now all the community has to do is chose. Simple, eh? ;-)
Yep. The article validation feature could eventually be used to automatically feed a list
of top
reviewed article versions. Those with the ability to mark revisions as stable would use
that list
to select stable versions. Policies on each wiki would dictate the standards that the
stable-making "prozacs" would need to follow.
Did I mention yet, that YOU ROCK! :)
-- mav
__________________________________________
Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about.
Just $16.99/mo. or less.
dsl.yahoo.com