Well, en.labs would be best, as it is a site for testing :D But yes, English Wikibooks is a good candidate once we have explored the issue of long-untouched pages (ie the trust should be recalculated, I think)
Mike
_____
From: wikiquality-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikiquality-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Luca de Alfaro Sent: August 26, 2008 10:59 PM To: Wikimedia Quality Discussions Subject: Re: [Wikiquality-l] WikiTrust v2 released: reputation andtrustforyour wiki in real-time!
Yes, I fully agree. We should start on a small project where people are interested. We can consider the bigger wikis later, once we are confident that we like it and it works the way we want. I was citing Enwiki just to discuss potential performance. Ian and I can help with advice etc anyone who wants to try this out. Luca
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 6:54 PM, Andrew Whitworth wknight8111@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 9:42 PM, mike.lifeguard
mike.lifeguard@gmail.com wrote:
even on the English Wikipedia (5 edits / second at most?) a single CPU would suffice
But why start so large? Pick a smaller test wiki first like, say, en.wikibooks? We can throw that into the queue of things we want installed down at WB.
--Andrew Whitworth
_______________________________________________ Wikiquality-l mailing list Wikiquality-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiquality-l