[Foundation-l] Frequency of Seeing Bad Versions - now with traffic data

[Alex]

Anthony wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 2:58 PM, Anthony <wikimail at inbox.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 2:50 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> I would put money on a significant majority of reverts being
>>> reverts of vandalism rather than BRD reverts, it may not be an
>>> overwhelming majority, though.
>>
>> I don't know about that, though I won't take the other end of the bet.
>>  Have you done much editing while not logged in?  If so, I think you have to
>> admit that it's quite common to find yourself reverted for things which are
>> not properly classified as vandalism.
>>
> 
> Just going through recent changes looking for "rv" (which is not the only
> thing detected by Robert's software, and is probably the most likely to be
> actual vandalism)...
> 

Most vandalism reversion on enwiki (I believe) is done with automated
tools and/or rollback rather than manual reversion.

They typically leave more detailed summaries:
"Reverted N edits by X identified as vandalism to last revision by Y"
"Reverted edits by X (talk) to last version by Y"

-- 
Alex (wikipedia:en:User:Mr.Z-man)