"Platonides" <Platonides(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:f7qg0l$a3a$1@sea.gmane.org... think? Well... they're contributing to the process, but they're not contributing to the content (which is, I think, the point of this feature). I would suggest marking edits that are just vandalism. A bot can then walk through the revisions skipping over any marked edits, and if two consecutive versions are the same then it marks the second one as a revert automatically (although page-moves and any other administrative tasks that don't change content (protection?) would also be picked up by this - however that may be a good thing, depending on the point of the excercise). I've been thinking for a while about using a field to tag the type of edit for each revision. The main purpose was to establish the actual content contributors for licensing purposes. A bot could handle a fair amount of this, but some would need to be done manually. Some of the flags include: "blanking", "reversion", "vandalism", "language tag", "categories", "references", "wikification", etc. The aim would be, ultimately, to get a list of authors that does not include administrative edits, vandalism or other non-content activities. - Mark Clements (HappyDog)

"Simetrical" <Simetrical+wikilist(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:7c2a12e20707200909l4bd76a34nf70fa31a4a6e7ad7@mail.gmail.com... True, but that won't work on its own. If I write a new article, someone else blanks it and a third person reverts to my original, then the third person will get credit for my work. In practice I think you need both - a way of marking some edits as ignored for licensing purposes (and I think it should be more flexible than a simple flag, as described in my previous post) and a blame tool so that only the authors of the current version are displayed. However, this becomes hard to do correctly when re-factoring is taken into account, so I would rather err on the side of caution (including people who may not have contributed) than to omit people who made a contribution that was subsequently jigged about by someone else. - Mark Clements (HappyDog)

Who gets the credit if I move a paragraph? Or correct the spelling of a word? Or, even worse, merge two articles? Annotating authors of individual bits of text is very challenging. Be great if someone can get it to work, though.