Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
Steve Bennett wrote: > On 10/1/09, Michael Peel wrote: > >> Is there much difference between the way a new (redlink) account is >> treated, and an IP account is treated? Perhaps using the former would >> give an indication to how the latter is treated? I tend to treat both >> as equally suspicious when I spot an edit by them - but I don't tend >> to bite. >> > Yeah. I just do the "don't bite" bit. Example, I came across this edit > recently: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bob_Randall&diff=316461923&oldid=310597871 > > Ok, now that text doesn't really belong. It's trivia. It's not > notable. It's even poorly written. But I left it. I couldn't see much > benefit in hurting some primary school kid's feelings over it. It's > only *slightly* too trivial, and definitely not in a harmful way. > Maybe if I come across it in a month or two I'll kill it then...but no > reason to tread on this kid's toes so quickly. > > Good point. A bit of friendly paternal guidance without a lot of boilerplate is a good first step. That might encourage them to do more in more constructive ways once they understand the underlying concepts. Some others, whose contributions a harmlessly bad, will tend to get bored of editing after being here only a shirt while; having the patience to wait until they have gone away before cleaning up will avoid a lot of drama. Ec ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
stevertigo wrote:> >> PPCD: >> - and "unfogiveable" only entered >> +and "unforgiveable" only entered The Cunctator wrote: > Your edits have been submitted for review. If it comes down to it, you can cuncate them without rejecting them entirely. That is, if the software allows that. Vaporware I mean. -Stevertigo ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
On 10/1/09, Michael Peel wrote: > Is there much difference between the way a new (redlink) account is > treated, and an IP account is treated? Perhaps using the former would > give an indication to how the latter is treated? I tend to treat both > as equally suspicious when I spot an edit by them - but I don't tend > to bite. Yeah. I just do the "don't bite" bit. Example, I came across this edit recently: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bob_Randall&diff=316461923&oldid=310597871 Ok, now that text doesn't really belong. It's trivia. It's not notable. It's even poorly written. But I left it. I couldn't see much benefit in hurting some primary school kid's feelings over it. It's only *slightly* too trivial, and definitely not in a harmful way. Maybe if I come across it in a month or two I'll kill it then...but no reason to tread on this kid's toes so quickly. Steve ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
David Gerard wrote: > 2009/9/29 Gregory Maxwell : > > >> Quality is just the default. >> "Draft"(unflagged) "Checked" "Reviewed", perhaps? >> > > > I suspect it's actually important to get this right first time - on > en:wp, policy formation is by someone making up a makeshift apparatus > off the top of their head, then later editors assuming this hacky > lashup is actually a gleaming carefully-designed stainless steel > apparatus and defending it past the point of actual death. > > Oh good god, isn't that the truth. What makes it worse is when people refuse to believe the person who made it up when he tells them it was all made up, and they carry on insisting it is in fact still carefully-designed and the real truth is that the designer must actually have some nefarious scheme in mind or something. I have no idea how to deal with these situations any more. I think David is right here, but if we're not implementing the "Reviewed" part yet, then we can kick it into the long grass, although we do need some idea of where we're going with it, because having some sort of destination will shape the route a little easier. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
On 1 Oct 2009, at 03:33, Steve Bennett wrote: > The thing that puts me off most, personally, is that the IP is > recorded and published. I wouldn't really care if there was some other > way to identify anonymous users, but raw IPs? Ick. Is there much difference between the way a new (redlink) account is treated, and an IP account is treated? Perhaps using the former would give an indication to how the latter is treated? I tend to treat both as equally suspicious when I spot an edit by them - but I don't tend to bite. Mike ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
On 9/30/09, David Gerard wrote: > Again, I reiterate that all experienced editors should try editing as > an IP for a while. See how well our propaganda matches the way we The thing that puts me off most, personally, is that the IP is recorded and published. I wouldn't really care if there was some other way to identify anonymous users, but raw IPs? Ick. (Not that I'm hiding anything, you only have to look through my photos and stubs to get a pretty clear idea of which suburb I live in. But still.) Steve ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
2009/9/29 Gregory Maxwell : > (I think established users forget how annoying becoming autoconfirmed > is— you have to wake a week and make a bunch of edits to non-semied > pages. This is pretty obnoxious when you just want to correct a simple > error on a single article) ^^^ This. Again, I reiterate that all experienced editors should try editing as an IP for a while. See how well our propaganda matches the way we actually treat apparent n00bs. (This is a standing recommendation on the functionaries list, by the way, so the most privileged en:wp users do try to keep themselves aware of this.) - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
Do we really need these different grades of reviewedness? Could I also suggest that the entire background colour of a page change to indicate what status you're looking at. Or maybe have a border around the page when you're looking at a reviewed version, and no border if you're not. I feel the need for some use cases or something to analyse exactly what we're trying to achieve and for whom. How are non-Wikipedians supposed to interact with this mechanism? What about regular editors? Steve ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
2009/9/29 Gregory Maxwell : > Quality is just the default. > "Draft"(unflagged) "Checked" "Reviewed", perhaps? I suspect it's actually important to get this right first time - on en:wp, policy formation is by someone making up a makeshift apparatus off the top of their head, then later editors assuming this hacky lashup is actually a gleaming carefully-designed stainless steel apparatus and defending it past the point of actual death. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 6:20 AM, David Gerard wrote: > > > > If you want to know how Flagged Revisions feels from an unprivileged > > position, go to Wikinews and fix typos. I just did this on > > > > > http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Geelong_win_2009_Australian_Football_League_Grand_Final > > - check the history. I'm not an admin or reviewer on en:wn. > > > > What did it feel like? Curiously unsatisfying. The fix not going live > > immediately left me wondering just when it would - five minutes/? An > > hour? A day? It felt nothing like editing a wiki - it felt like I'd > > submitted a form to a completely opaque bureaucracy for review at > > their leisure. > > > UI fail. > > There is no reason for you to know or care that your edit isn't being > displayed to the general public. It's being displayed to you, it's > being displayed to all the other editors, it's being displayed to > anons who click a link to see the latest. > > It's our own damn fault for making the UI say the equivalent of "NOW > YOU MUST WAIT WHILE OUR TRIBE OF ELDERS SCRUTINIZES YOUR PATHETIC > EDIT" … we don't have to do it this way, and we shouldn't do it this > way. > > The process can and should be made mostly invisible to casual editors. > > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 7:15 AM, Surreptitiousness > wrote: > > edits, and they don't get checked in greater detail. Looking at it, > > it's entirely plausible we're going to have people from all over the > > world examining edits outside their context. That's going to mean things > > will get missed, isn't it? Not saying it isn't any better than the > > current model, but at least with the current model someone will not > > assume something is good since they will know it hasn't been checked. > > The way I see it — What this is about is two fold: > Right now an edit to an article can often go hours before someone > experienced with editing takes a look at it. During that time the > completely unscrutinized edit is displayed to the world. The flagging > changes the failure mode: We display an older edition when review gets > missed. > > Yes, the evils of the unscrutinized edit. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote: > Gregory Maxwell wrote: >> UI fail. >> >> There is no reason for you to know or care that your edit isn't being >> displayed to the general public. It's being displayed to you, it's >> being displayed to all the other editors, it's being displayed to >> anons who click a link to see the latest. >> > I hope you won't feel bad about me saying that I most > deeply and soundly disagree with the above view. > > The thing that -- at the very least used to -- attracts newbies > to wikipedia is the "positive astonishment" factor: 'What, I > just edited this web-page, and everybody all over the world > saw the result immediately! That can't be right, there has to > be a catch somewhere! Wow, there isn't! That is what *really* > happens! Awesome!' > > For this reason, I won't ever agree that being visible for > in house 'editors' or casual folks sophisticated enough to check > and see if there are new non-approved edits, as a > default, is good universally, rather than as a last resort. Cimon! Tisk tisk. Try to argue with the position I express, not just one you speculate I might also hold. :) Who here said anything about "good universally" vs "a last resort"? My position is that if an edit is only going to be instantly displayed by default to tens of thousands of people rather than hundreds of millions, we shouldn't make the editor feel like he is lesser for it or give them the impression that its now stuck waiting for some intensive review (especially since thats now how we intend to make it work). The deferral of an edit doesn't make a lick of practical difference in how someone interacts with the site. I agree that it can make a psychological difference— and that is why we should avoid rubbing the contributors face in it. We don't have a big notice at the top of the edit screen for new users that says "Notice: Based on editing statistics there is a 25% chance that your non-vandalism edit will be reverted[Chi2009]". Care to speculate on what kind of impact that would have on participation? So my position here isn't a position about how often flagging should be applied; it's a position about mitigating the harm caused by flagging. Mitigating the harm is worthwhile even when flagging is used as a "last resort" or used more liberally. Hopefully you aren't of the school of thought that says that we should make sure that flagging maximally harms participation in order ensure its failure. :) (Though I do have a position: — Last resort? It shouldn't be a last resort. The last resort should be page protection. Hopefully you agree that deferring display to the portion of our readers least able to cope with bad edits is less harmful than completely inhibiting editing!) ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
David Goodman wrote: > If enWikipedia has only 4,000 active editors, and we don't do better > at this than, we are going to keep up with only a very few articles. > The plan will work , though, for the most watched articles, > fortunately where they are needed, because that's the ones where > people people catch errors now. In other words, as a substitute for > semi-protection for most semi'd pages, not flagging a significant > number of pages addition to them. It won't do a thing to reduce the > gross vandalism that now gets uncaught for hours. It might provide a > clearer focus on the ones that get caught in a few minutes, and keep > the vandalism off them for those few minutes. But that's all that can > be expected of it > > Of course, if we are talking about the work that will get done, it is most important to answer the question "should this work be getting done?" And that seems a clear "Yes". We don't ever get the "magic bullet" technical solution that ensures that everything gets done that should be. That is not how the system works, it's the asymptote. Charles ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
2009/9/29 Risker : > 2009/9/29 Gregory Maxwell >> The place where the comparison to NPP falls short is that NPP doesn't >> *do* anything, except coordinate with other people using the >> feature and people don't use it because it doesn't do anything >> >> > > To me, as someone who periodically does NPP, the most frustrating part is > having to work from that list and not being able to go back and forth > easily; if I need to AfD or PROD a page, or even make a small fix, it's a > real pain. It doesn't surprise me that there aren't a lot of people doing > NPP. Bingo. NPP exists solely in one place. You will only ever mark a page as "patrolled" if you sit down and say, right, today I will do NPP; you have to go to that central page and follow a link, and even then the status of "patrolled" only exists in reference to that central page. A casual editor coming across that page won't be able to mark it as patrolled; won't be able to see that it has or hasn't been. It's effectively a service for people looking at special:newpages, and nothing else. Once we have a basic set of patrolled revisons up and running, NPP becomes almost entirely moot, a special case of what'll be happening anyway, and presumably the system will be quietly turned off once PR is well-understood. -- - Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 7:48 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote: > Gregory Maxwell wrote: >> The process can and should be made mostly invisible to casual editors. > > Like I said, you don't want the process to be 'invisible' > to casual editors, you want it to be *transparently open*. Is it possible to experiment to see which works best? Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
Gregory Maxwell wrote: > On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 6:20 AM, David Gerard wrote: > >> If you want to know how Flagged Revisions feels from an unprivileged >> position, go to Wikinews and fix typos. I just did this on >> >> http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Geelong_win_2009_Australian_Football_League_Grand_Final >> - check the history. I'm not an admin or reviewer on en:wn. >> >> What did it feel like? Curiously unsatisfying. The fix not going live >> immediately left me wondering just when it would - five minutes/? An >> hour? A day? It felt nothing like editing a wiki - it felt like I'd >> submitted a form to a completely opaque bureaucracy for review at >> their leisure. >> > > > UI fail. > > There is no reason for you to know or care that your edit isn't being > displayed to the general public. It's being displayed to you, it's > being displayed to all the other editors, it's being displayed to > anons who click a link to see the latest. > I hope you won't feel bad about me saying that I most deeply and soundly disagree with the above view. The thing that -- at the very least used to -- attracts newbies to wikipedia is the "positive astonishment" factor: 'What, I just edited this web-page, and everybody all over the world saw the result immediately! That can't be right, there has to be a catch somewhere! Wow, there isn't! That is what *really* happens! Awesome!' For this reason, I won't ever agree that being visible for in house 'editors' or casual folks sophisticated enough to check and see if there are new non-approved edits, as a default, is good universally, rather than as a last resort. > It's our own damn fault for making the UI say the equivalent of "NOW > YOU MUST WAIT WHILE OUR TRIBE OF ELDERS SCRUTINIZES YOUR PATHETIC > EDIT" … we don't have to do it this way, and we shouldn't do it this > way. > > The process can and should be made mostly invisible to casual editors. > Like I said, you don't want the process to be 'invisible' to casual editors, you want it to be *transparently open*. Yours, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
2009/9/29 Gregory Maxwell > On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 2:17 PM, David Goodman > wrote: > > The comparisons being made to NPP are interesting, because I see a lot > > of the problems NPP does not pick up--the articles which drop off the > > bottom of the list after a month and consequently that we no longer > > The place where the comparison to NPP falls short is that NPP doesn't > *do* anything, except coordinate with other people using the > feature and people don't use it because it doesn't do anything > > To me, as someone who periodically does NPP, the most frustrating part is having to work from that list and not being able to go back and forth easily; if I need to AfD or PROD a page, or even make a small fix, it's a real pain. It doesn't surprise me that there aren't a lot of people doing NPP. Risker ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 2:17 PM, David Goodman wrote: > The comparisons being made to NPP are interesting, because I see a lot > of the problems NPP does not pick up--the articles which drop off the > bottom of the list after a month and consequently that we no longer The place where the comparison to NPP falls short is that NPP doesn't *do* anything, except coordinate with other people using the feature and people don't use it because it doesn't do anything In the past couple of days only 84 users have patrolled a page created by someone else on ENwp. Of the 1344 new pages patrolled by non-authors in this sample, 631 of them were done by only the top four users (DragonflySixtyseven, Shadowjams, Racklever, NuclearWarfare) and 1091 by the top 20. I think it's reasonable to believe that more people will participate with a system which does something useful (and which doesn't forget). But we'll have to see. [snip] > number of pages addition to them. It won't do a thing to reduce the > gross vandalism that now gets uncaught for hours. It might provide a > clearer focus on the ones that get caught in a few minutes, and keep > the vandalism off them for those few minutes. But that's all that can > be expected of it On popular articles we should be looking for something else— I agree that on popular articles the vandalism improvement will be smaller than on more obscure articles, but on the popular articles the real advantage over normal protection is that it OPENS UP EDITING again. (I think established users forget how annoying becoming autoconfirmed is— you have to wake a week and make a bunch of edits to non-semied pages. This is pretty obnoxious when you just want to correct a simple error on a single article) ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
The comparisons being made to NPP are interesting, because I see a lot of the problems NPP does not pick up--the articles which drop off the bottom of the list after a month and consequently that we no longer keep track of, the absolutely lousy articles people often pass over without notice, or with just a tag, when a delete nomination is what is needed, and of course the over-eager or incorrect nominations for deletion. I would say of the pages actually checked, about 20% are being done wrong in one way or another--or perhaps it's 10%. It's still over a hundred pages a day. If enWikipedia has only 4,000 active editors, and we don't do better at this than, we are going to keep up with only a very few articles. The plan will work , though, for the most watched articles, fortunately where they are needed, because that's the ones where people people catch errors now. In other words, as a substitute for semi-protection for most semi'd pages, not flagging a significant number of pages addition to them. It won't do a thing to reduce the gross vandalism that now gets uncaught for hours. It might provide a clearer focus on the ones that get caught in a few minutes, and keep the vandalism off them for those few minutes. But that's all that can be expected of it David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 12:31 PM, Surreptitiousness > wrote: >> Gregory Maxwell wrote: >>> >>> This is another area where the UI can have a real impact: It's >>> important the it not overstate the level of review that is occurring. >>> Right now flaggedrevs.labs.wikimedia.org is calling the levels >>> "Draft" "Checked" and "quality", but this is under active discussion. >> Quality might be pushing it then. I'd suggest "article", but I can't >> work out how "Checked" fits in. Maybe "Documented" would work better? > > Quality is just the default. > > "Draft"(unflagged) "Checked" "Reviewed", perhaps? > > AFAIK there has been no effort on enwp to figure out what is necessary > and sufficient for a higher grade of flagging, I think we generally > know what the lowest grade means: It's stuff that you think probably > won't be reverted, or some similar low bar. > > I think that it may not be useful to worry about the definition of the > higher grade of flagging until more people are comfortable with how > the feature works in practice. Baby steps. > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 12:31 PM, Surreptitiousness wrote: > Gregory Maxwell wrote: >> >> This is another area where the UI can have a real impact: It's >> important the it not overstate the level of review that is occurring. >> Right now flaggedrevs.labs.wikimedia.org is calling the levels >> "Draft" "Checked" and "quality", but this is under active discussion. > Quality might be pushing it then. I'd suggest "article", but I can't > work out how "Checked" fits in. Maybe "Documented" would work better? Quality is just the default. "Draft"(unflagged) "Checked" "Reviewed", perhaps? AFAIK there has been no effort on enwp to figure out what is necessary and sufficient for a higher grade of flagging, I think we generally know what the lowest grade means: It's stuff that you think probably won't be reverted, or some similar low bar. I think that it may not be useful to worry about the definition of the higher grade of flagging until more people are comfortable with how the feature works in practice. Baby steps. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
Gregory Maxwell wrote: > > This is another area where the UI can have a real impact: It's > important the it not overstate the level of review that is occurring. > Right now flaggedrevs.labs.wikimedia.org is calling the levels > "Draft" "Checked" and "quality", but this is under active discussion. Quality might be pushing it then. I'd suggest "article", but I can't work out how "Checked" fits in. Maybe "Documented" would work better? ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 6:20 AM, David Gerard wrote: > > If you want to know how Flagged Revisions feels from an unprivileged > position, go to Wikinews and fix typos. I just did this on > > http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Geelong_win_2009_Australian_Football_League_Grand_Final > - check the history. I'm not an admin or reviewer on en:wn. > > What did it feel like? Curiously unsatisfying. The fix not going live > immediately left me wondering just when it would - five minutes/? An > hour? A day? It felt nothing like editing a wiki - it felt like I'd > submitted a form to a completely opaque bureaucracy for review at > their leisure. UI fail. There is no reason for you to know or care that your edit isn't being displayed to the general public. It's being displayed to you, it's being displayed to all the other editors, it's being displayed to anons who click a link to see the latest. It's our own damn fault for making the UI say the equivalent of "NOW YOU MUST WAIT WHILE OUR TRIBE OF ELDERS SCRUTINIZES YOUR PATHETIC EDIT" … we don't have to do it this way, and we shouldn't do it this way. The process can and should be made mostly invisible to casual editors. On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 7:15 AM, Surreptitiousness wrote: > edits, and they don't get checked in greater detail. Looking at it, > it's entirely plausible we're going to have people from all over the > world examining edits outside their context. That's going to mean things > will get missed, isn't it? Not saying it isn't any better than the > current model, but at least with the current model someone will not > assume something is good since they will know it hasn't been checked. The way I see it — What this is about is two fold: Right now an edit to an article can often go hours before someone experienced with editing takes a look at it. During that time the completely unscrutinized edit is displayed to the world. The flagging changes the failure mode: We display an older edition when review gets missed. And the tool also provides a way to decrease the time that a review is missed by providing visible tracking of the review status. The tool also avoids wasted effort on redundant reviewing (i.e. how many people look at every good edit to George W. Bush just to reach the redundant determination that it doesn't need to be reverted). Your concern that the review-collaboration may prevent changes from being noticed by qualified contributors but this has been addressed in multiple ways: There are multiple review levels which can be applied, i.e. the "checked for obvious tripe" vs "blessed by geniuses" and we haven't seen complaints of that with things like new page patrol (which is under-utilized, but used). I think what we'll find is that subject matter expert contributors who are watching articles are going to want to look at all the changes changes regardless of the flagging status, since they'll have concerns about presentation and style which go even beyond simple accuracy concerns. It is easier to do this kind of reviewing as a subject matter expert with flagged revisions because you can limit yourself to diffing between the flagged versions, allowing you to skip intermediate bad edits which have be resolved by recent change patrollers. This is another area where the UI can have a real impact: It's important the it not overstate the level of review that is occurring. Right now flaggedrevs.labs.wikimedia.org is calling the levels "Draft" "Checked" and "quality", but this is under active discussion. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
2009/9/29 Surreptitiousness : > Couple of points I want to raise. I was wondering if this system will > make another Siegenthaller incident more or less likely. My > understanding is that the flagged revs is only to prevent obvious > vandalism, it isn't set up so that each addition has to be verified > before it goes live. Is that correct? If so, wouldn't that mean that > once something has been through the flagged rev net, there's a > possibility of a culture arising that assumes such edits are "good" > edits, and they don't get checked in greater detail. Looking at it, > it's entirely plausible we're going to have people from all over the > world examining edits outside their context. That's going to mean things > will get missed, isn't it? Not saying it isn't any better than the > current model, but at least with the current model someone will not > assume something is good since they will know it hasn't been checked. There should be two separate stages of review for all edits (both now and with FlaggedRevs) - there is RC-patrol that just checks for vandalism and then there are people going through their watchlists to check if edits have actually improved the article. If people start thinking that passing RC-patrol means they don't need to check it when it appears on their watchlist, then we have a problem, but let's wait and see if that actually happens or not. > Secondly, isn't it plausible that the longer a flagged rev isn't passed, > the more likely it is that it will never pass. By which I mean that if > something sits there for ten to fifteen minutes, people will start to > get nervous about passing it, because they will attach an irrational > fear to it, basing that on the perceived fact that if it wasn't a > complicated issue it would have passed by now? Does that make sense? > And then it seems the two sort of feed into each other. We either pass > stuff unless it's blatant, but then we miss targeted, malicious > disruption, or we go in depth but then run the risk of rendering the > solution unworkable. Apologies if these have been discussed before. I > still don't have a real handle on how it will all work. > But I'm still failing to understand why the community won't semi-protect > all BLP's. Is there actually a need to? I think most of our serious BLP problems are caused by experienced, but misguided, editors. We should only throw a way a very useful resource (new editors) if we have a good reason. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
stevertigo wrote: > Thomas Dalton wrote: > >> 5% of edits taking more that FOUR HUNDRED AND THIRTY NINE HOURS EIGHT >> MINUTES AND FIFTY FIVE SECONDS?! That is unforgivable, even with every >> article included. They either have too strict criteria for sighting so >> too many people say "Oh, I'm not sure/don't have time to work that >> out, I'll leave it to someone else" or people aren't working through >> the backlog in order. >> > > Um... Hm. The words "unaccepable" and "unfogiveable" only entered the > lexicon after the Siegenthaller meteorite impacted and wiped out all > notions that "collaboration," "consensus," and "wikilove" were > sufficient. > > The fact of the matter was then, remains so, and will remain so, that > some articles are just not as notable, and therefore won't get seen > and won't get checked on anyone's schedule.** There is no issue of > "unforgivability' involved at all, even if we can say that there is a > serious issue of "unacceptability." > > And even then, the focus on BLP articles comes not from a general > appreciation for 'reliability,' but from a practical need to focus on > people that can write editorials, a logical limitation on the usage of > the "unacceptability" as a whip, and a healthy fear of 'let's not get > our assets sued.' Couple of points I want to raise. I was wondering if this system will make another Siegenthaller incident more or less likely. My understanding is that the flagged revs is only to prevent obvious vandalism, it isn't set up so that each addition has to be verified before it goes live. Is that correct? If so, wouldn't that mean that once something has been through the flagged rev net, there's a possibility of a culture arising that assumes such edits are "good" edits, and they don't get checked in greater detail. Looking at it, it's entirely plausible we're going to have people from all over the world examining edits outside their context. That's going to mean things will get missed, isn't it? Not saying it isn't any better than the current model, but at least with the current model someone will not assume something is good since they will know it hasn't been checked. Secondly, isn't it plausible that the longer a flagged rev isn't passed, the more likely it is that it will never pass. By which I mean that if something sits there for ten to fifteen minutes, people will start to get nervous about passing it, because they will attach an irrational fear to it, basing that on the perceived fact that if it wasn't a complicated issue it would have passed by now? Does that make sense? And then it seems the two sort of feed into each other. We either pass stuff unless it's blatant, but then we miss targeted, malicious disruption, or we go in depth but then run the risk of rendering the solution unworkable. Apologies if these have been discussed before. I still don't have a real handle on how it will all work. But I'm still failing to understand why the community won't semi-protect all BLP's. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 6:20 AM, David Gerard wrote: If you want to know how Flagged Revisions feels from an unprivileged position, go to Wikinews and fix typos. I just did this on http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Geelong_win_2009_Australian_Football_League_Grand_Final - check the history. I'm not an admin or reviewer on en:wn. What did it feel like? Curiously unsatisfying. The fix not going live immediately left me wondering just when it would - five minutes/? An hour? A day? It felt nothing like editing a wiki - it felt like I'd submitted a form to a completely opaque bureaucracy for review at their leisure. Don't take my word for it - go typo-fixing on Wikinews and tell me how it feels to you. So, yeah. I remain a big fan of flagged revisions for those times when we need it - basically, as a less-worse alternative to protection or semiprotection. But it really does kill the wiki motivational buzz dead. - d. "After the posting of the 26th May The Secretary of the WM Foundation Had articles distributed in the MSM Stating that the editors Had forfeited the confidence of the foundation And could win it back only By redoubled efforts. Would it not be easier In that case for the foundation To dissolve the community And elect another?" (With apologies to Bertolt Brecht.) -- gwern signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
2009/9/27 stevertigo : > Thomas Dalton wrote: >> But RC-patrol and review flagging are very similar and can both be >> done by endless slogging. > > Slogging is slogging. Slogging is not editing. I disagree, but I don't see the relevance anyway. Whether you consider anti-vandalism efforts to be editing or not, they are still necessary. >>> I just understand that there are better ways to do "it," (whatever >>> that means), ways to do "it" better, and ways to do a better "it." In >>> a nutshell, I mean. >> >> You've lost me there! Sounds brilliant, but I have no idea what it means... > > It means my services don't come cheap. You have completely lost me now... ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
Thomas Dalton wrote: > But RC-patrol and review flagging are very similar and can both be > done by endless slogging. Slogging is slogging. Slogging is not editing. >> I just understand that there are better ways to do "it," (whatever >> that means), ways to do "it" better, and ways to do a better "it." In >> a nutshell, I mean. > > You've lost me there! Sounds brilliant, but I have no idea what it means... It means my services don't come cheap. -Stevertigo ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
2009/9/27 stevertigo : > Thomas Dalton wrote: >> While people are, of course, free to choose what to work >> on, that is a fundamental part of the way Wikipedia works, it makes >> sense to encourage people to work in a particular way. > > Well there are several different types of things that people do, and > the ones that require editorial discernment just don't equate with the > things that can be done by endless slogging nameless user cycles. But RC-patrol and review flagging are very similar and can both be done by endless slogging. >> Indeed, but FlaggedRevs will fix that problem > > Did you just say "panacea?" No. I clearly said "that problem" not "all problems". >> That difference doesn't look significant to me giving >> dewiki relatively more highly active users than enwiki, which I would >> expect to mean dewiki would handle such reviews better than enwiki. > > Well there you go. > > I just understand that there are better ways to do "it," (whatever > that means), ways to do "it" better, and ways to do a better "it." In > a nutshell, I mean. You've lost me there! Sounds brilliant, but I have no idea what it means... ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
Thomas Dalton wrote: > While people are, of course, free to choose what to work > on, that is a fundamental part of the way Wikipedia works, it makes > sense to encourage people to work in a particular way. Well there are several different types of things that people do, and the ones that require editorial discernment just don't equate with the things that can be done by endless slogging nameless user cycles. > Indeed, but FlaggedRevs will fix that problem Did you just say "panacea?" > That difference doesn't look significant to me giving > dewiki relatively more highly active users than enwiki, which I would > expect to mean dewiki would handle such reviews better than enwiki. Well there you go. I just understand that there are better ways to do "it," (whatever that means), ways to do "it" better, and ways to do a better "it." In a nutshell, I mean. - Stevertigo ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
2009/9/27 Andrew Gray : > and the conclusion I meant to add: patrolling will, potentially, be > able to supplant "RC patrol" as we know it now; because > patrolled-revisions is basically a tool for avoiding RC duplication > and for making revision-management easier. It will probably end up > about as backlogged as RC patrol can be, but at least it'll be > trackably so, and unpatrolled revisions will get weeded out over time > as newer edits are committed to the same page and then (hopefully) > checked. Indeed. RC-patrol doesn't really get backlogged, things just get missed. Patrolled edits should fix that and give us a good idea of whether we would cope with switching everything to flagged revs. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
2009/9/27 Andrew Gray : > 2009/9/27 Thomas Dalton : > >> There may be an issue with only having some pages under the review >> system - we will need to split effort between RC-patrol and >> ORP-patrol. Hopefully that will happen organically, but we will need >> to keep an eye on it. It is possible that having all articles under >> review will actually result in quicker reviews since all the >> RC-patrollers can just move over to ORP-patrol. > > Remember that as planned, there will be two installations running in parallel. (...) and the conclusion I meant to add: patrolling will, potentially, be able to supplant "RC patrol" as we know it now; because patrolled-revisions is basically a tool for avoiding RC duplication and for making revision-management easier. It will probably end up about as backlogged as RC patrol can be, but at least it'll be trackably so, and unpatrolled revisions will get weeded out over time as newer edits are committed to the same page and then (hopefully) checked. Even if we're inept, though, it won't impact on the *reader*. It might impact on readers of mirrors - if we can get dumps or live feeds which just show the most recent patrolled revision for every page, that'd be fun, and I can see a demand for it. I'm confident we'll manage the critical stuff, though - flagged protection - in good time and good order, deo volente. -- - Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
2009/9/27 Thomas Dalton : > There may be an issue with only having some pages under the review > system - we will need to split effort between RC-patrol and > ORP-patrol. Hopefully that will happen organically, but we will need > to keep an eye on it. It is possible that having all articles under > review will actually result in quicker reviews since all the > RC-patrollers can just move over to ORP-patrol. Remember that as planned, there will be two installations running in parallel. * Patrolled revisions, passive, on all pages * Flagged protection, active, on a few (tens of?) thousand pages Flagged protection is wikinews or dewiki style; edits mostly don't show up until approved. This is the one we will need to stay on top of, but I am confident we'll manage it - it's a small proportion of pages, after all. The problem case here is going to be the "protected because of sheer volume of edits" pages, where I think we'll lag horribly for any individual edit, but get a workable result. Patrolled revisions will be on all pages, and will let us mark the "most recent good revision". This one doesn't matter so much if it's backlogged, because *it's invisible*; edits show up whether or not they've been patrolled, and it just gives us an internal monitoring tool. -- - Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
2009/9/27 Steve Bennett : > On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 5:22 AM, Thomas Dalton > wrote: >> I think we should have flagged revs for as many articles as we can >> keep up-to-date with. If it takes more than 5 minutes (preferably 1 >> minute) to review an edit (except for occasional times when somehow a >> backlog builds up and it takes a few minutes for people to realise and >> work through it), then we have failed. If we can have every single >> article on flagged revs and still keep on top of them, then we should >> do that. If we can't, then we should keep it to just a small number of >> articles that really need it. > > All of this implies some sort of well thought out and implement > workflow functionality in Wikipedia. Do we have this? Do we have real > queues of articles to be reviewed and automatic processes that > highlight articles that have been waiting too long? Maybe I'm out of > the loop, but I had the impression that with stuff like vandal > fighting and new page monitoring, each editor essentially acts > independently of any others, meaning there is a lot of doubling up of > work...and some pages slip through the cracks. > > Do we have any way of combatting this with flagged revisions? Yes. [[Special:OldReviewedPages]] contains a list of pages that have been reviewed at least once but have been edited since the last review, people just need to work through that list in order. Hopefully the people that write tools like Huggle will update them to take things edits out of that list to be checked. There may be an issue with only having some pages under the review system - we will need to split effort between RC-patrol and ORP-patrol. Hopefully that will happen organically, but we will need to keep an eye on it. It is possible that having all articles under review will actually result in quicker reviews since all the RC-patrollers can just move over to ORP-patrol. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 5:22 AM, Thomas Dalton wrote: > I think we should have flagged revs for as many articles as we can > keep up-to-date with. If it takes more than 5 minutes (preferably 1 > minute) to review an edit (except for occasional times when somehow a > backlog builds up and it takes a few minutes for people to realise and > work through it), then we have failed. If we can have every single > article on flagged revs and still keep on top of them, then we should > do that. If we can't, then we should keep it to just a small number of > articles that really need it. All of this implies some sort of well thought out and implement workflow functionality in Wikipedia. Do we have this? Do we have real queues of articles to be reviewed and automatic processes that highlight articles that have been waiting too long? Maybe I'm out of the loop, but I had the impression that with stuff like vandal fighting and new page monitoring, each editor essentially acts independently of any others, meaning there is a lot of doubling up of work...and some pages slip through the cracks. Do we have any way of combatting this with flagged revisions? Steve ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
2009/9/27 stevertigo : > Thomas Dalton wrote: >> I disagree. I don't see why notability should be a factor. > > Notability might be the wrong word. 'Degree of interest' is perhaps > the more accurate term. No interest = no page views = no checks > for... topical completeness, bland writing, wandering organization, > politicized emphasis, or casual stigmatizing slander... Indeed. It was clear what you meant and I interpreted it in that light. >> People should review edits in chronological order (for sighting, anyway - >> quality is different matter entirely). > > You lost me at "people should," which, in contexts where the 'herding > cats' metaphor is relevant, is actually quite a misnomer. Ok, replace that with "In my opinion the best outcome would result from people". While people are, of course, free to choose what to work on, that is a fundamental part of the way Wikipedia works, it makes sense to encourage people to work in a particular way. >> RC patrollers on enwiki don't pick and choose which edits to review, and I > >> can't see why dewiki would be any different. > > RC goes by too fast to 'patrol,' so maybe there is some better word > for what humans are actually doing in that data stream. "Sampling," > maybe. Indeed, but FlaggedRevs will fix that problem - people will know which edits haven't already been reviewed because they will the ones on Special:OldReviewedPages. (Or, if we don't have all pages under review, the patrolled revisions feature that will be implemented on enwiki at the same time as FlaggedRevs [as I understand it] achieves the same goal.) > So don't forget to factor in the ratio between en.wiki's and de.wiki's > EPM counts - mod the IP to user/admin ratios for each. Very true, but I don't think there is actually that large a difference. I will look it up... In August 2009, enwiki had 40857 users making more than 5 edits and 4 million edits, giving a ratio of 98 edits per active user. In the same month, dewiki had 6864 such users and 720,000 edits, giving a ratio of 105 edits per active user. That difference doesn't look significant to me. I know those aren't exactly the statistics you asked for, but I think they give a good impression and were very easy to find. If we consider highly active users (>100 per month), then enwiki had 4113 and dewiki 1000, giving dewiki relatively more highly active users than enwiki, which I would expect to mean dewiki would handle such reviews better than enwiki. It will be interesting to see what happens... (we may only find out if the community are willing to turn on reviews for all articles if it appears we will be able to cope). ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
Thomas Dalton wrote: > I disagree. I don't see why notability should be a factor. Notability might be the wrong word. 'Degree of interest' is perhaps the more accurate term. No interest = no page views = no checks for... topical completeness, bland writing, wandering organization, politicized emphasis, or casual stigmatizing slander... > People should review edits in chronological order (for sighting, anyway - > quality is different matter entirely). You lost me at "people should," which, in contexts where the 'herding cats' metaphor is relevant, is actually quite a misnomer. > RC patrollers on enwiki don't pick and choose which edits to review, and I > > can't see why dewiki would be any different. RC goes by too fast to 'patrol,' so maybe there is some better word for what humans are actually doing in that data stream. "Sampling," maybe. So don't forget to factor in the ratio between en.wiki's and de.wiki's EPM counts - mod the IP to user/admin ratios for each. -Stevertigo "Burn it down, 'till the embers smoke on the ground..." ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
2009/9/27 Thomas Dalton : >> You'd think so, but that's not what the german statistics say- the >> anonymous still edit at about the same rate. > > Do we know how many anonymous editors made more than one edit anyway? > Perhaps most of the people that made multiple edits registered after > the first edit or two, if that is the case then we would expect to see > a drop in registrations, not in anonymous edits. Looking at the stats > ([1]) there is a noticeable (and sustained) drop between March and > April of this year with a similar drop in number of edits at the same > time - when did they introduce FlaggedRevs? Answering my own question - 6th May. So one month after the drop began. Odd. Did anything else happen to cause that drop? ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
2009/9/27 Ian Woollard : > On 26/09/2009, David Gerard wrote: >> de:wp manages about one third in the first hour. That's really not >> enough unless there's sone urgent need to stop Wikipedia newbie >> editing dead. > > You'd think so, but that's not what the german statistics say- the > anonymous still edit at about the same rate. Do we know how many anonymous editors made more than one edit anyway? Perhaps most of the people that made multiple edits registered after the first edit or two, if that is the case then we would expect to see a drop in registrations, not in anonymous edits. Looking at the stats ([1]) there is a noticeable (and sustained) drop between March and April of this year with a similar drop in number of edits at the same time - when did they introduce FlaggedRevs? > You'd also think that there would be a reduction in vandalism, but > that's also not what the statistics say; the vandals don't seem to > notice. I never really expected a drop in vandalism, I just expect it to just be seen less and fixed slightly quicker. 1. http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaDE.htm ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
On 26/09/2009, David Gerard wrote: > de:wp manages about one third in the first hour. That's really not > enough unless there's sone urgent need to stop Wikipedia newbie > editing dead. You'd think so, but that's not what the german statistics say- the anonymous still edit at about the same rate. You'd also think that there would be a reduction in vandalism, but that's also not what the statistics say; the vandals don't seem to notice. > - d. -- -Ian Woollard ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
2009/9/26 stevertigo : > The fact of the matter was then, remains so, and will remain so, that > some articles are just not as notable, and therefore won't get seen > and won't get checked on anyone's schedule.** There is no issue of > "unforgivability' involved at all, even if we can say that there is a > serious issue of "unacceptability." I disagree. I don't see why notability should be a factor. People should review edits in chronological order (for sighting, anyway - quality is different matter entirely). RC patrollers on enwiki don't pick and choose which edits to review, and I can't see why dewiki would be any different. Flagging revisions should just be a slightly different (and more efficient) way of doing RC patrol. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
Your edits have been submitted for review. On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 4:45 PM, stevertigo wrote: > PPCD: > > stevertigo wrote: > > - and "unfogiveable" only entered > +and "unforgiveable" only entered > > - but from a practical need to focus on people that can write editorials, > +but from a logical need to focus on people that can write editorials, > > -a logical limitation on the usage of the "unacceptability" as a whip > +a practical limitation on the usage of the "unacceptability" as a whip > > - Stevertigo > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
PPCD: stevertigo wrote: - and "unfogiveable" only entered +and "unforgiveable" only entered - but from a practical need to focus on people that can write editorials, +but from a logical need to focus on people that can write editorials, -a logical limitation on the usage of the "unacceptability" as a whip +a practical limitation on the usage of the "unacceptability" as a whip - Stevertigo ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
Thomas Dalton wrote: > 5% of edits taking more that FOUR HUNDRED AND THIRTY NINE HOURS EIGHT > MINUTES AND FIFTY FIVE SECONDS?! That is unforgivable, even with every > article included. They either have too strict criteria for sighting so > too many people say "Oh, I'm not sure/don't have time to work that > out, I'll leave it to someone else" or people aren't working through > the backlog in order. Um... Hm. The words "unaccepable" and "unfogiveable" only entered the lexicon after the Siegenthaller meteorite impacted and wiped out all notions that "collaboration," "consensus," and "wikilove" were sufficient. The fact of the matter was then, remains so, and will remain so, that some articles are just not as notable, and therefore won't get seen and won't get checked on anyone's schedule.** There is no issue of "unforgivability' involved at all, even if we can say that there is a serious issue of "unacceptability." And even then, the focus on BLP articles comes not from a general appreciation for 'reliability,' but from a practical need to focus on people that can write editorials, a logical limitation on the usage of the "unacceptability" as a whip, and a healthy fear of 'let's not get our assets sued.' - Stevertigo ** Techs: A script to list unviewed articles based on time. Ie. 'it's been 1y2m16d since the [[Newsmodel]] article has been checked for sex appeal.' ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
2009/9/26 David Gerard : > http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spezial:Markierungsstatistik > > Those numbers would be a disaster. This I think is why the trial is so > limited. 5% of edits taking more that FOUR HUNDRED AND THIRTY NINE HOURS EIGHT MINUTES AND FIFTY FIVE SECONDS?! That is unforgivable, even with every article included. They either have too strict criteria for sighting so too many people say "Oh, I'm not sure/don't have time to work that out, I'll leave it to someone else" or people aren't working through the backlog in order. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
2009/9/26 The Cunctator : > The problem is that one of the fundamental rules of interactive design is > that anything less than real time feedback is profoundly disorienting. To > some degree that can be ameliorated if once someone submitted a flagged > revision some kind of counter appears immediately that lets them know their > revision will be checked within x minutes. (and if, say it isn't checked by > then the editor is told that people are being notified of the failure of the > system.) I would like that - a notice saying that most edits are reviewed within 5 minutes and then, in the event of a failure, a automated message on the talk page apologising. Good idea. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
> > > (We need New Page patrollers to make sure > every new page gets its first review very quickly - they are usually > good at keeping on top of new pages.) > > _ > Given that New Page Patrol is constantly at a backlog of between 27-30 days (that is, there are always a significant number of new pages of that age), while at the same time we have problems with new pages being patrolled *too quickly* and CSD'd within 2 minutes, I think we will see the same issue with flagged revisions: that is, some edits being quickly passed without proper review, allowing sneaky vandalism in, while others take so long to be reviewed it takes away the wiki flavour. On the other hand, it might be a very different way of managing edit warring. Risker ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
2009/9/26 David Gerard : > de:wp manages about one third in the first hour. That's really not > enough unless there's sone urgent need to stop Wikipedia newbie > editing dead. Doesn't dewiki have an installed-everywhere version of flagged revisions, though? That's almost a million article pages - even with a massive proliferation of flagged-protection, there's not going to be anywhere near that order of magnitude on the enwiki implementation. -- - Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
The problem is that one of the fundamental rules of interactive design is that anything less than real time feedback is profoundly disorienting. To some degree that can be ameliorated if once someone submitted a flagged revision some kind of counter appears immediately that lets them know their revision will be checked within x minutes. (and if, say it isn't checked by then the editor is told that people are being notified of the failure of the system.) On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote: > 2009/9/26 David Gerard : > > 2009/9/26 Thomas Dalton : > > > >> I think we should have flagged revs for as many articles as we can > >> keep up-to-date with. If it takes more than 5 minutes (preferably 1 > >> minute) to review an edit (except for occasional times when somehow a > >> backlog builds up and it takes a few minutes for people to realise and > >> work through it), then we have failed. If we can have every single > >> article on flagged revs and still keep on top of them, then we should > >> do that. If we can't, then we should keep it to just a small number of > >> articles that really need it. > > > > > > de:wp manages about one third in the first hour. That's really not > > enough unless there's sone urgent need to stop Wikipedia newbie > > editing dead. > > No, IMO they have failed. It should be literally 100% of edits reviews > in 5 minutes the vast majority of the time. I would set a target of > the lag on Special:OldReviewedPages should be less than 5 minutes 99% > of the time. If we fail to reach that target, we need to reduce the > number of articles we are using the extension on. I really think that > is achievable though, even with every article included - we already > have RC-patrollers checking most edits within a few minutes and this > extension would make it much easier to avoid duplicate effort. Do any > of the vandal-fighter tools (like Huggle) handle working through the > OldReviewedPages in order? (We need New Page patrollers to make sure > every new page gets its first review very quickly - they are usually > good at keeping on top of new pages.) > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
2009/9/26 Thomas Dalton : > 2009/9/26 David Gerard : >> de:wp manages about one third in the first hour. That's really not >> enough unless there's sone urgent need to stop Wikipedia newbie >> editing dead. > No, IMO they have failed. It should be literally 100% of edits reviews > in 5 minutes the vast majority of the time. I would set a target of > the lag on Special:OldReviewedPages should be less than 5 minutes 99% > of the time. If we fail to reach that target, we need to reduce the > number of articles we are using the extension on. I really think that > is achievable though, even with every article included - we already > have RC-patrollers checking most edits within a few minutes and this > extension would make it much easier to avoid duplicate effort. Do any > of the vandal-fighter tools (like Huggle) handle working through the > OldReviewedPages in order? (We need New Page patrollers to make sure > every new page gets its first review very quickly - they are usually > good at keeping on top of new pages.) http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spezial:Markierungsstatistik Those numbers would be a disaster. This I think is why the trial is so limited. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
2009/9/26 David Gerard : > 2009/9/26 Thomas Dalton : > >> I think we should have flagged revs for as many articles as we can >> keep up-to-date with. If it takes more than 5 minutes (preferably 1 >> minute) to review an edit (except for occasional times when somehow a >> backlog builds up and it takes a few minutes for people to realise and >> work through it), then we have failed. If we can have every single >> article on flagged revs and still keep on top of them, then we should >> do that. If we can't, then we should keep it to just a small number of >> articles that really need it. > > > de:wp manages about one third in the first hour. That's really not > enough unless there's sone urgent need to stop Wikipedia newbie > editing dead. No, IMO they have failed. It should be literally 100% of edits reviews in 5 minutes the vast majority of the time. I would set a target of the lag on Special:OldReviewedPages should be less than 5 minutes 99% of the time. If we fail to reach that target, we need to reduce the number of articles we are using the extension on. I really think that is achievable though, even with every article included - we already have RC-patrollers checking most edits within a few minutes and this extension would make it much easier to avoid duplicate effort. Do any of the vandal-fighter tools (like Huggle) handle working through the OldReviewedPages in order? (We need New Page patrollers to make sure every new page gets its first review very quickly - they are usually good at keeping on top of new pages.) ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 1:22 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote: > 2009/9/26 David Gerard : > > If you want to know how Flagged Revisions feels from an unprivileged > > position, go to Wikinews and fix typos. I just did this on > > > http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Geelong_win_2009_Australian_Football_League_Grand_Final > > - check the history. I'm not an admin or reviewer on en:wn. > > > > What did it feel like? Curiously unsatisfying. The fix not going live > > immediately left me wondering just when it would - five minutes/? An > > hour? A day? It felt nothing like editing a wiki - it felt like I'd > > submitted a form to a completely opaque bureaucracy for review at > > their leisure. > > > > Don't take my word for it - go typo-fixing on Wikinews and tell me how > > it feels to you. > > > > So, yeah. I remain a big fan of flagged revisions for those times when > > we need it - basically, as a less-worse alternative to protection or > > semiprotection. But it really does kill the wiki motivational buzz > > dead. > > I think we should have flagged revs for as many articles as we can > keep up-to-date with. If it takes more than 5 minutes (preferably 1 > minute) to review an edit (except for occasional times when somehow a > backlog builds up and it takes a few minutes for people to realise and > work through it), then we have failed. If we can have every single > article on flagged revs and still keep on top of them, then we should > do that. If we can't, then we should keep it to just a small number of > articles that really need it. > > I strongly agree with this. We should view our ability to flag-lock articles as a resource which is limited by the number of editors that are able to sustainably review such edits. As long as we are able to handle the edits in near real time we haven't over-sold/over-extended our capacity. Anything like the experience others are describing in this thread is probably (hopefully...) going to be found unacceptable by Wikipedia. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
I've just been looking at these statistics: http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Special:ValidationStatistics The median time for review is nice and small, but the average is lot higher and the average lag is even higher - that means there are a small number of reviews taking far too long (in fact, about 10% take more than an hour) but most are being done nice and fast. I don't know the reason for that, but one possible explanation is that people are just reviewing edits they see while doing other things rather than actually going through the list of out-dated articles in order from oldest to newest. I think those stats are for both "sighted" and "quality" reviews, so I'm not quite sure which reviews are taking a long time, but sighting an edit shouldn't require any knowledge of the article, so doing them in order seems the best option. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
2009/9/26 Thomas Dalton : > I think we should have flagged revs for as many articles as we can > keep up-to-date with. If it takes more than 5 minutes (preferably 1 > minute) to review an edit (except for occasional times when somehow a > backlog builds up and it takes a few minutes for people to realise and > work through it), then we have failed. If we can have every single > article on flagged revs and still keep on top of them, then we should > do that. If we can't, then we should keep it to just a small number of > articles that really need it. de:wp manages about one third in the first hour. That's really not enough unless there's sone urgent need to stop Wikipedia newbie editing dead. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
2009/9/26 David Gerard : > If you want to know how Flagged Revisions feels from an unprivileged > position, go to Wikinews and fix typos. I just did this on > http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Geelong_win_2009_Australian_Football_League_Grand_Final > - check the history. I'm not an admin or reviewer on en:wn. > > What did it feel like? Curiously unsatisfying. The fix not going live > immediately left me wondering just when it would - five minutes/? An > hour? A day? It felt nothing like editing a wiki - it felt like I'd > submitted a form to a completely opaque bureaucracy for review at > their leisure. > > Don't take my word for it - go typo-fixing on Wikinews and tell me how > it feels to you. > > So, yeah. I remain a big fan of flagged revisions for those times when > we need it - basically, as a less-worse alternative to protection or > semiprotection. But it really does kill the wiki motivational buzz > dead. I think we should have flagged revs for as many articles as we can keep up-to-date with. If it takes more than 5 minutes (preferably 1 minute) to review an edit (except for occasional times when somehow a backlog builds up and it takes a few minutes for people to realise and work through it), then we have failed. If we can have every single article on flagged revs and still keep on top of them, then we should do that. If we can't, then we should keep it to just a small number of articles that really need it. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
David Gerard wrote: > What did it feel like? Curiously unsatisfying. The fix not going live > immediately left me wondering just when it would - five minutes/? An > hour? A day? It felt nothing like editing a wiki - it felt like I'd > submitted a form to a completely opaque bureaucracy for review at > their leisure. David, you very well know these problems are easily solved: 1) Put up with FR for a few months 2) Rack up clean edits 3) Apply for adminship 4) Get past it's politicized voting process... ...and you're set. - Stevertigo No wiki-crack for you. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
Yes, I sincerely hope that we don't use it more than we use protection now. That's the promise we've all been making outside the community for a long time, I don't think we should prove the reporters right. :) Judson http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cohesion ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
On 26/09/2009, David Gerard wrote: > If you want to know how Flagged Revisions feels from an unprivileged > position, go to Wikinews and fix typos. I just did this on > http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Geelong_win_2009_Australian_Football_League_Grand_Final > - check the history. I'm not an admin or reviewer on en:wn. > > What did it feel like? Curiously unsatisfying. The fix not going live > immediately left me wondering just when it would - five minutes/? An > hour? A day? It felt nothing like editing a wiki - it felt like I'd > submitted a form to a completely opaque bureaucracy for review at > their leisure. Yes, I did that a while back. I suspect it's worse for a news site though; I wrote an item for it, and then it was up for checking, but they didn't allow it to go live due to trivial formatting issues I was able to fix in a few minutes. It then got held in limbo for another day while I waited for it to be revetted, then they rejected it again, another couple of minutes of fixing and then after *another* day, it went live. And this is supposed to be a news site. Frankly, I haven't gone back. I think it will work a lot better on wikipedia though; it's not the same type of site. > - d. -- -Ian Woollard ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[WikiEN-l] So what does Flagged Revs feel like?
If you want to know how Flagged Revisions feels from an unprivileged position, go to Wikinews and fix typos. I just did this on http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Geelong_win_2009_Australian_Football_League_Grand_Final - check the history. I'm not an admin or reviewer on en:wn. What did it feel like? Curiously unsatisfying. The fix not going live immediately left me wondering just when it would - five minutes/? An hour? A day? It felt nothing like editing a wiki - it felt like I'd submitted a form to a completely opaque bureaucracy for review at their leisure. Don't take my word for it - go typo-fixing on Wikinews and tell me how it feels to you. So, yeah. I remain a big fan of flagged revisions for those times when we need it - basically, as a less-worse alternative to protection or semiprotection. But it really does kill the wiki motivational buzz dead. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
