[Foundation-l] en.wp HACKED?

[risker.wp at gmail.com]

Perhaps not. One of the weaknesses of flagged revisions is that it enshrines vandalism. The required review of all changes and redaction of personal attacks only adds more steps to the resolution of each episode of vandalism. Semi-protection would be more likely to halt inappropriate edits to templates without unnecessarily adding to anyone's workload. 

Risker/Anne
Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network

-----Original Message-----
From: Samuel Klein <meta.sj at gmail.com>
Sender: foundation-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 02:04:32 
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List<foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
Reply-To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] en.wp HACKED?

This is a great idea.  SJ

On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 1:45 AM, Nikola Smolenski <smolensk at eunet.rs> wrote:
> On 06/19/2011 07:37 PM, Ryan Lomonaco wrote:
>> I recognize that this is probably a touchy issue given the controversy on
>> the English Wikipedia over flagged revisions (which I thankfully wasn't a
>> part of), but maybe flipping flagged revisions on for everything in the
>> template namespace would help the cause.  Certainly most edits to templates
>
> Indeed. I believe that one of the main points against flagged revisions
> is that they will put off new users because their edits won't be
> immediately visible, however very few new users start by editing templates.
>
>_______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



-- 
Samuel Klein          identi.ca:sj           w:user:sj          +1 617 529 4266

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l