I'm completely with Aaron here. I even think it's crucial that the
"sighted version"-feature gets enabled on all the pages: to gain more
trust from our readers, to not open a new playing field for vandals, and
maybe most important to make the RC-patrolling much more efficient.
At least it should be done in the German Wikipedia this way, that's the
result of the many many discussions we had. If it scales I'm pretty sure
the English Wikipedia will follow very soon. Nowadays quite many
community members shy away from big changes, even if they are
desperately needed. But we shouldn't.
Aaron Schulz schrieb:
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 If the issue is that is would get outdated, then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
> 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
> Is that contemplated? Can we make sure it does that?