Hi, I'm a newcomer to the developers group. I uploaded in the branch SHOW_VERIFIED a modified version of MediaWiki where I added a new feature. This wants to be an alternative to the page protection. I added a verify/unverify button: 'verify' sets the current revision (or the one indexed by oldid) as the verified one for that page. This means that any user can edit the page, but the new revisions are not shown (though they can be accessed through the hystory, where the currently 'verified' revision is shown in bold characters) until a sysop 'verifies' it again. 'unverify', of course, removes this protection.
If anyone wants to test it, after setting the wiki up, it's sufficient to add "$wgEnableVerify = true;" to LocalSettings.php. Any suggestion is welcome.
Regards, Salvatore Ingala
On 25/07/05, Salvatore Ingala spider87@katamail.com wrote:
Hi, I'm a newcomer to the developers group. I uploaded in the branch SHOW_VERIFIED a modified version of MediaWiki where I added a new feature. This wants to be an alternative to the page protection. I added a verify/unverify button: 'verify' sets the current revision (or the one indexed by oldid) as the verified one for that page. This means that any user can edit the page, but the new revisions are not shown (though they can be accessed through the hystory, where the currently 'verified' revision is shown in bold characters) until a sysop 'verifies' it again. 'unverify', of course, removes this protection.
How do you set who is allowed to verify?
How do you set who is allowed to verify?
Sysops are allowed to verify:
In DefaultSettings.php: $wgGroupPermissions['sysop']['verify'] = true; $wgGroupPermissions['sysop']['unverify'] = true;
Of course this may be changed if needed, but I think this is usually the better solution.
Salvatore Ingala:
Hi, I'm a newcomer to the developers group. I uploaded in the branch SHOW_VERIFIED a modified version of MediaWiki where I added a new feature. This wants to be an alternative to the page protection. I added a verify/unverify button: 'verify' sets the current revision (or the one indexed by oldid) as the verified one for that page. This means that any user can edit the page, but the new revisions are not shown (though they can be accessed through the hystory, where the currently 'verified' revision is shown in bold characters) until a sysop 'verifies' it again. 'unverify', of course, removes this protection.
This is a step in the right direction. Something similar has been discussed for a while, with an additional element: The live version of the page is replaced *automatically* with the temporary version after a set period of time without edits. In combination with 3RR, this could lead to an open, consensus-based approach to updating contentious pages. This idea is described in http://usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?StableCopy and linked pages and has been tossed around a few times as a way to get rid of protected pages. See also this thread from January 2003: http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2003-January/026211.html
Your current implementation has the drawback that it might become very popular soon, even on pages where we otherwise try to avoid protection, and give sysops too much editorial responsibility. Of course, it can hardly get worse than it is now, where some articles, such as http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexueller_Missbrauch_von_Kindern have been protected for months (that one since April!).
Best,
Erik
This is a step in the right direction. Something similar has been discussed for a while, with an additional element: The live version of the page is replaced *automatically* with the temporary version after a set period of time without edits.
As pointed out by the e-mail you linked, the timer part would be not-so-easy, even if I think it may be a good idea.
Your current implementation has the drawback that it might become very popular soon, even on pages where we otherwise try to avoid protection, and give sysops too much editorial responsibility.
IMHO sysops should be thought as reasonable people, so it shouldn't be difficult to dissuade them from abusing of the feature.
Regards, Salvatore
Awesome. When you edit a verified page, do you edit the verified version, or the latest version? This could be a user preference.
SJ
On 7/24/05, Salvatore Ingala spider87@katamail.com wrote:
Hi, I'm a newcomer to the developers group. I uploaded in the branch SHOW_VERIFIED a modified version of MediaWiki where I added a new feature. This wants to be an alternative to the page protection. I added a verify/unverify button: 'verify' sets the current revision (or the one indexed by oldid) as the verified one for that page. This means that any user can edit the page, but the new revisions are not shown (though they can be accessed through the hystory, where the currently 'verified' revision is shown in bold characters) until a sysop 'verifies' it again. 'unverify', of course, removes this protection.
If anyone wants to test it, after setting the wiki up, it's sufficient to add "$wgEnableVerify = true;" to LocalSettings.php. Any suggestion is welcome.
Regards, Salvatore Ingala
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Awesome. When you edit a verified page, do you edit the verified version, or the latest version? This could be a user preference.
I preferred to make the user edit the latest revision by default (that is, when $oldid is empty). This is because I wanted the verify feature not to interfere with the article editing (but just with article viewing). Of course this may be changed, and the user can still view and edit any version from the history.
Salvatore
Salvatore Ingala wrote:
Awesome. When you edit a verified page, do you edit the verified version, or the latest version? This could be a user preference.
I preferred to make the user edit the latest revision by default (that is, when $oldid is empty). This is because I wanted the verify feature not to interfere with the article editing (but just with article viewing). Of course this may be changed, and the user can still view and edit any version from the history.
That sounds nice and sane. :)
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org