This list should now be open for subscriptions; I'll send a quick
announcement (together with a first version of quality.wikimedia.org)
later.
--
Toward Peace, Love & Progress:
Erik
DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
http://quality.wikimedia.org/
User: Reader
Password: qareader
Do not pass it on quite yet, but please feel free to make basic edits
or layout improvements & do provide feedback here or off-list.
Plan:
1) At least two beta sites will be set up using the FlaggedRevs
extension[1] in two different configurations; these will contain some
English language and some German language demonstration content.
Repeat, DEMONSTRATION CONTENT ONLY. NO REAL WIKIMEDIA PROJECT.
Philipp Birken from WM-DE and I will provide the configuration for
these sites to Brion, who is expected to conclude a security review of
the extension this week.
The page [[Wikiquality]] on Meta will also describe these
configurations, along with some other general info. It is currently
non-existent (do not report).
2) These FlaggedRevs demo sites will go live probably next week. I
suggest a target date of September 20; Sue will finalize this.
Should there be major security or scalability concerns even for a
demo, we can roll back.
3) quality.wikimedia.org: The point is to have portals for major
quality initiatives in Wikipedia and other projects, and an associated
open mailing list. (The list is currently still closed, as it was used
for discussions about FlaggedRevs development.)
These portals should be fairly basic & only point to information
elsewhere. I expect that we will give interested people from the
community & translators access to editing quality.wikimedia.org.
Ironically the site itself would benefit from a FlaggedRevs
configuration, which we may very well put into place if it turns out
to be useful.
Originally I wanted to co-launch this with the beta, but New Scientist
is going to publish a larger piece about Wikimedia quality initiatives
on Thursday, so I thought it would be good to have it up by then,
since it also very visibly suggests making a donation & we don't know
if we might see a bit of a media cascade.
I can quickly fix up some links (link to an off-site demo of
FlaggedRevs for now), open the site & list, and announce them to
various Wikimedia mailing lists before Thursday. If this is _not_
desired, please let me know, and I'll email New Scientist & ask them
to remove the link. But IMHO there is no real risk in going live with
it. Even if we don't take the beta live as expected it'll be a useful
site to have.
4) If there are no remaining security or scalability concerns, after a
declared date, which I suggest to be November 20 (which is also the
middle of the fundraiser and hence a good attention-grabbing moment),
we'll give Wikimedia project/language communities the _option_ of
turning on the extension. To do so, they'll have to point to a
consensus or vote that also explains the configuration they would like
to use (the extension is very flexible).
I expect that de.wp already has such a consensus so they will probably
go live at that date. It may well be possible for en.wp to obtain a
consensus during the beta, in which case it would launch at the same
time. But IMHO the correct answer for press inquiries of "who will be
using the extension" is "this will be determined during the beta, most
likely the German Wikipedia will be among the first".
BugZilla will be used to track these site requests, as was done for
semi-protection.
Once again, the above date will be finalized by Sue.
Comments?
[1] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:FlaggedRevs
--
Toward Peace, Love & Progress:
Erik
DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
Crossposting with internal
I"m again on a conference right now and will be back next Saturday, so
starting on 20. September sounds very good. As for the starting date,
I suggest actually doing this sooner. If it turns out that one month
of Beta is sufficient, we should turn on this long-awaited extension.
I don't think it is necessarily bad if the good news of stable
versions first sinks in and after some weeks, we ask perople for
money.
Bye,
Philipp
2007/9/10, Erik Moeller <erik(a)wikimedia.org>:
> http://quality.wikimedia.org/
>
> User: Reader
> Password: qareader
>
> Do not pass it on quite yet, but please feel free to make basic edits
> or layout improvements & do provide feedback here or off-list.
>
> Plan:
>
> 1) At least two beta sites will be set up using the FlaggedRevs
> extension[1] in two different configurations; these will contain some
> English language and some German language demonstration content.
> Repeat, DEMONSTRATION CONTENT ONLY. NO REAL WIKIMEDIA PROJECT.
>
> Philipp Birken from WM-DE and I will provide the configuration for
> these sites to Brion, who is expected to conclude a security review of
> the extension this week.
>
> The page [[Wikiquality]] on Meta will also describe these
> configurations, along with some other general info. It is currently
> non-existent (do not report).
>
> 2) These FlaggedRevs demo sites will go live probably next week. I
> suggest a target date of September 20; Sue will finalize this.
>
> Should there be major security or scalability concerns even for a
> demo, we can roll back.
>
> 3) quality.wikimedia.org: The point is to have portals for major
> quality initiatives in Wikipedia and other projects, and an associated
> open mailing list. (The list is currently still closed, as it was used
> for discussions about FlaggedRevs development.)
>
> These portals should be fairly basic & only point to information
> elsewhere. I expect that we will give interested people from the
> community & translators access to editing quality.wikimedia.org.
> Ironically the site itself would benefit from a FlaggedRevs
> configuration, which we may very well put into place if it turns out
> to be useful.
>
> Originally I wanted to co-launch this with the beta, but New Scientist
> is going to publish a larger piece about Wikimedia quality initiatives
> on Thursday, so I thought it would be good to have it up by then,
> since it also very visibly suggests making a donation & we don't know
> if we might see a bit of a media cascade.
>
> I can quickly fix up some links (link to an off-site demo of
> FlaggedRevs for now), open the site & list, and announce them to
> various Wikimedia mailing lists before Thursday. If this is _not_
> desired, please let me know, and I'll email New Scientist & ask them
> to remove the link. But IMHO there is no real risk in going live with
> it. Even if we don't take the beta live as expected it'll be a useful
> site to have.
>
> 4) If there are no remaining security or scalability concerns, after a
> declared date, which I suggest to be November 20 (which is also the
> middle of the fundraiser and hence a good attention-grabbing moment),
> we'll give Wikimedia project/language communities the _option_ of
> turning on the extension. To do so, they'll have to point to a
> consensus or vote that also explains the configuration they would like
> to use (the extension is very flexible).
>
> I expect that de.wp already has such a consensus so they will probably
> go live at that date. It may well be possible for en.wp to obtain a
> consensus during the beta, in which case it would launch at the same
> time. But IMHO the correct answer for press inquiries of "who will be
> using the extension" is "this will be determined during the beta, most
> likely the German Wikipedia will be among the first".
>
> BugZilla will be used to track these site requests, as was done for
> semi-protection.
>
> Once again, the above date will be finalized by Sue.
>
> Comments?
>
> [1] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:FlaggedRevs
>
> --
> Toward Peace, Love & Progress:
> Erik
>
> DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
> the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Internal-l mailing list
> Internal-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-l
>
Hiho,
I'm not sure about two issues.
1) In the box used for reviewing, a checkbox for watching the page is
provided. I'm not sure we need that in the box in the first place, but
at least it should swap places with the comment box, since the comment
box belongs functionally to the upper part of the box.
2) I'm also not convinced about the usefuleness of the "stable
version" button next to the article button. This is what the GUI also
does and therefore, users have two ways of doing stuff, whereas both
GUIs are more powerful. Shouldn't we remove that button? Also, the
number of buttons has become quite large already, in particular for
users with a lot of rights?
Bye,
Philipp
It's been considered. I've never really got the reasons for it though. Who
determines whether the stable version is the default or not? I don't like it
being sysops, and if is 'sighters'/whatever, then what would that really
accomplish? If the issue is that is would get outdated, then people
shouldn't review things no one will follow up on enough.
It also requires another table just to store whether to make the stable
version the default. Plus, it makes the interface more complicated and what
version is the default seems more random and confusing to readers.
Also, please use wikiquality-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org for stable versions stuff
;)
-Aaron Schulz
>From: Jimmy Wales <jwales(a)wikia.com>
>To: jschulz_4587(a)msn.com
>Subject: stable versions... a few thoughts
>Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 21:50:49 -0400
>
>
>I think it is absolutely (absolutely!) imperative that stable versions has
>to be enabled and disabled per-page, like protection or semi-protection.
>If it is not, then there is just absolutely no way it will ever go on
>English Wikipedia - and not likely anywhere else either.
>
>Is that contemplated? Can we make sure it does that?
_________________________________________________________________
Now you can see trouble before he arrives
http://newlivehotmail.com/?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_viral_protection_0507
I'm trying out FlaggedRevs to see how far we are from deployment. I'm
seeing the following issues right now (local install, default
configuration):
* Diffs that are not to the current revision point to the wrong
version. (i.e. the review panel at the bottom will tag the current
revision, even if neither of the two revs are current).
* Edits by users who can review should not need to be reviewed at
least at the basic level; is there any way to configure this? It seems
pointless to flag edits by trusted users as being in need for
vandalism review.
* When the last sighted version and the current version are identical,
anon users (if so configured) still have to click through to the
"current" (identical) version to edit. This seems an unnecessary hoop
to jump through.
These seem like core issues to me. In addition, some wishlist items:
* In the original specs we suggested that users can approve unreviewed
changes with a collapsible diff + checkbox on the actual edit page
when editing an unreviewed version; this still seems like a very
simple way to integrate review into normal editing workflow.
* Switching the default view for all non-registered visitors would be
a very radical thing to do when we haven't figured out yet how
scalable the system is. Changes might end up being unreviewed for
weeks as a result, rendering articles about current events unusable
and making it much harder for new users to discover the site. It seems
more sensible to change the default view on a per-page basis for some
highly problematic pages which are currently semi-protected, and to
gradually increase the number of pages that are in this mode.
I'll try to come up with some more feedback regarding the UI.
--
Toward Peace, Love & Progress:
Erik
DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
Hiho,
following the advice of both Erik and me, Sue Gardner has decided that
we should move on to an open Betatest. This test will take place on
some testserver of the foundation, soon after Brion or Tim have given
their OK on the security of the extension, hopefully in about one or
two weeks.
So, let's try and apply some pre-beta finishing touch to this :-)
Cheers,
Philipp
Hiho,
I just testes the template stuff and I think there is a problem.
Namely that if you change a template, you have to create a new version
of all articles it appears in to make the change visible. This renders
templates a bit useless. Hardwiring stable versions with the templates
as they were is a good feature to me, but I think we definitely should
make exceptions for the current version.
Bye, the next week I'll have limited email access,
Philipp
The University of Santa Cruz/California has an interesting demo up
that computes author trust based on whether users' edits are
kept/improved or reverted. It then highlights passages of the text
according to the computed reputation of the author who added them:
http://trust.cse.ucsc.edu/http://enwiki-trust.cse.ucsc.edu/index.php/Special:Random
NB, this is still very experimental, but it seems promising.
Luca de Alfaro, who did most of this work, will also be presenting at Wikimania.
--
Toward Peace, Love & Progress:
Erik
DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
Hiho,
at this point, I would like to thank everybody for their input and
work, especially Jörg and Aaron. And in particular, Aaron, who has
continued for months to do most of the work. I believe, most people
would at some point just stopped contributing, after months of working
on the same topic and done something else. Therefore, thanks Aaron for
bringing us here.
This thanks has of course a reason, namely that after seeing the new
synched Wiki at http://tools.wikimedia.de/~stable/phase3, I realized
that from the softwarewise functionality, we are finished, as we now
have the functional link from watchlist and recent changes to the
flagged revision. This is not as I would have liked (see my
description mail, but now that I have seen it: it is something I would
go live with. Therefore, what remains is bugfixing, tuning the setting
and the user guidance and the GUI.
So, see you in three weeks.
Cheers,
Philipp