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:
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