If you want to pick out the malicious changes, you need to flag also small changes.
"Sen. Hillary Clinton did *not* vote in favor of war in Iraq"
"John Doe, born in *1947*"
The ** indicates changes.
I can very well make a system that is insensitive to small changes, but then the system would also be insensitive to many kinds of malicious tampering, and one of my goals was to make it hard for anyone to change without leaving at laest a minimal trace.
So it's a matter of goals, really.
Luca
On Dec 21, 2007 10:01 AM, Jonathan Leybovich jleybov@gmail.com wrote:
One thing that stood out for me in the small sample of articles I examined was the flagging of innocuous changes by casual users to correct spelling, grammar, etc. Thus a "nice-to-have" would be a "smoothing" algorithm that ignores inconsequential changes such as spelling corrections, etc. or the reordering of semantically-contained units of text (for example, reordering the line items in a list w/o changing the content of any particular line item, etc., or the reordering of paragraphs and perhaps even sentences.) I think this would cover 90% or more of changes that are immaterial to an article's credibility.
Wikiquality-l mailing list Wikiquality-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiquality-l