[WikiEN-l] assessing

[FT2]

In simplest terms, the idea is "wouldn't it be nice if edits that weren't
even /plausibly/ valid would get filtered out and not shown to the world as
our work and as encyclopedia content?"

The other idea is "We have tens of thousands of well meaning editors, can we
ask users who have shown they can be trusted, to filter out those edits that
are completely idiotic, before they hit the main pages?"

Everything else is "how can we implement this without disrupting the
positive flow of good edits, or holding them up minimally or transparently
to check the rest?"

Nobody knows how it'll work out, or what the best approach is, how it needs
to evolve to not disrupt our better editorial processes (hence the long
discussions and trials), but in all the approaches, that's the basic idea.


FT2




On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Surreptitiousness <
surreptitious.wikipedian at googlemail.com> wrote:

> David Gerard wrote:
> > I think the shock was realising this is the product. Yes, that live
> > working draft is the actual product. And this may actually be a
> > feature.
> >
> > Distributions of Wikipedia content turn out to be secondary - the
> > working site turns out to be the actual product.
> >
> > Flaged revs all through would separate "draft" and "public" copies,
> > but at the expense of the motivational effects of the working draft
> > being live and public.
> >
> > There is no "inished". It's an eternal present.
> >
>
> These are all good points I agree with. I hadn't actually considered the
> point about flagged revs, probably because I don't actually understand
> as yet what flagged revs are.  I think I'll only understand once they
> actually happen, but in my head they're a bit like the yellow bar on the
> new page patrol, and you only get to see content in the yellow bar
> version of the page if you have that secret power turned on. Or
> something. This is probably wildly inaccurate and yet staggeringly close
> to actuality.  Yes, the article will no longer be a working draft.
> Blimey, this really is a big change.  Now I understand why I saw you on
> newsnight. Hmmm.  So if the page is no longer a working draft, what does
> that mean for the consensus by editing method we've utilised until now?
> Is this why there is talk of 20 000 new editors needed, because there'll
> be a page like recent changes and we need people to sit there and
> manually sign off on every edit?  I think from what I can make out
> certain groups of users are already signed off?  Damn, if only my german
> was better I'd go see how it works. And this is important to the point
> we need to make it work, isn't it? Out of curiousity, is this similar to
> the switch IMDB made a few years back? Or am I misremembering that you
> used to be able to have more interactivity at that site? Sorry, this has
> all been done to death somewhere else, I'm sure, but it tends to start
> containing lots of words I don't grok like flagged and revisions and
> other stuff, rather than getting at the general philosophy and the
> general impact.
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>