Erik Moeller wrote:
I totally agree
with all of this. But I'm not sure that the time is
ripe just yet. Perhaps in another year. I'm open to alternative
points of view on this, but I think we're not close enough yet to
"well rounded" to start seriously worrying about these issues.
If there's any interest at all in this among other developers, how about
working on it on a separate CVS branch? Then we could try it on, say,
meta.wp and merge it into HEAD + use it on
wikipedia.org when we're
happy with the way it works.
I take it you mean the "sysops and truster reviews only" thingy? Can-do,
sure. But, honestly, I don't think I'd go around checking ~90000
articles, including 35000 one-cow-metropoles ;-)
IMHO that experiment would fail not because of missing technology, but
of lack of reviewers.
I'd prefer "Larrypedia" myself, where people dedicated to reviewing can
work their magic.
Personally, I think that we're reaching the point
where we need this
because WP is becoming too big for us to oversee, so we can't really
guarantee that it is crap-free.
We never did! Our warranty always was and is "good luck"! :-)
Magnus