/me slaps "send"
On 10/17/07, Luiz Augusto lugusto@gmail.com wrote:
This thread have received some followup at wikiquality-l that aren't delivered to here (wikisource-l), including a proposal to host a unofficial test-wiki for Wikisource [1] and a reply to ThomasV [2]
On regards to [1], this is IMHO a great option and I think that the default configuration for MediaWiki and FlaggedRevs is sufficient (list of configuration options for FlaggedRevs: [3]),
since my worry is related to transclusion issues from the LabeledSectionTransclusion extension and interactions between ProofreadPage javascript and FlaggedRevs javascript
[1] -
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikiquality-l/2007-October/000359.html [2] - http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikiquality-l/2007-October/000363.html [3] - http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:FlaggedRevs#Configuration
On 10/15/07, Birgitte SB birgitte_sb@yahoo.com wrote:
I disagree. I think this extension will be even more useful for Wikisource than Wikipedia. Text stability is a more important goal at Wikisource. This is what flaggedrevs offers: stability. I certainly hope it it will work on Wikisource projects.
BirgitteSB
--- thomasV1@gmx.de wrote:
Flaggedrevs had been designed with Wikipedia in mind. Writing an encyclopedy article is about confronting multiple points of view. During this process, the quality of an article might not always improve; the purpose of Flaggedrevs is to flag some revisions as "non draft", while still allowing users to modify the article.
I do not think that this would be useful for Wikisource. A decrease of quality on a wikisource article can be
agreed upon in a much more objective way. Introducing flaggedrevs will likely result on confusion and useless complexity.
(I am not even sure if Flaggedrevs will solve the problems faced by wikipedia; once the community know what it really is about, they might realize technology does not replace expertise...)
-------- Original-Nachricht --------
Datum: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 22:39:04 -0300 Von: "Luiz Augusto" lugusto@gmail.com An: wikiquality-l@lists.wikimedia.org CC: wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org Betreff: [Wikisource-l] Feedback and beta-testing
from non-Wikipedia projects
(sorry for my English and for the crossposting)
I known that the FlaggedRevs extension is under a
review stage and their
development is devoted basically to the needs from
the most known
Wikimedia project. This is ok to me, no worries on it. But
since more Wikimedia
projects have users watching the development of
this feature, I think that
only two future official wikis for the public beta
testing is
insufficient.
Wikisource, for example, have
LabeledSectionTransclusion and ProofreadPage
enabled on all of yours wikis. These extensions
may have issues to work
appropriately with FlaggedRevs. Enabling these two
extensions at the same
wiki devoted to the English Wikipedia beta-testing
may generate some
troubles with the en.wp users that don't known how
and why Wikisource have
these extensions, to exemplify with only one of
the possible reactions.
Not enabling these two extensions + FlaggedRevs at
someplace may create false
hopes. And I think that knowing that issues and
waiting for someone with
the required skills to fix them when get time to work
on it is more proper
instead of a community (a Wikisource wiki) gaining
consensus to request
FlaggedRevs getting enabled and finding that a new
nice feature brokes
another one.
[[:m:User:555]]