[Wikiquality-l] Some thoughts on details

Some summary comments about things brought up on this list: Erik wrote about some details, which attributes may be useful/are intented. I think this would cause some interface problems: a) The history would contain multiple comments for a single version, as wan't to tag an older version without making this the newest one. b) The Changelog entry isn't that often used currently. As it is intented to allow the basic ("sighted") flag to all users with 30 edits/30 days (or a similat threshold) and to allow tagging on save as well (if the user did check the sighted button) this would cause more harm than benefit. c) So maybe only for the "checked" version tag which can only be applied by a tiny group of appointed users could use such a thing. Buteven in this case I'd advocate for some reedit feature of history comments (something we definetely could reuse in other context, such as correcting third party credit afterwards right in the history). The "sighted" version is an automatic threshold such as 30 days/30 edits. The "checked" version people should be an appointed group different from admins. Thatfor I advocate beureaucrats to be able to appoint those people. IMHO no. Per default the checkbox setting these flags on editing should be unchecked (but maybe configurable via user settings). People often edit an article several times until they are happy. So something like "whoops I did automatically set sighted flag on a half done version" is not good. @Joerg Baach (and others): Are there any further mockups wanted (beside the ones already ceated by me) If so which one? http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Mockup-sighted-version-diff.png http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Mockup-sighted-version… http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Sighted-version-mockup… @all: Are there any other mockups about that? Chers, Arnomane / Daniel Arnold