Pending Revisions conveys that publication is deferred, but not for what
reason.
Based on only the name it leaves a new editor guessing: maybe there is a
server delay and the matter will resolve itself in next twenty minutes?
Double Check or Revision Review tells clearly there is human
On 24 May 2010, at 07:57, Erik Zachte wrote:
Revision Review is my favorite. It seems more neutral, also less 'heavy' in
connotations than Double Check.
Also Review is clearly a term for a process, unlike Revisions.
The downside is that 'Review' could be linked to an editorial review, and
Indeed revision and review makes the impression that much more is
done than actually is. (Revision = not only a check, but also
alterations, it sounds to me.) I am afraid that is the problem with
pretty much of all the expressions that have been put in forum.
In German Wikipedia, our word
Aye I personally think edit is much simpler for people then revision
which I think will confuse more people, especially English learners/2nd
language (COI notice: Simple English Wikipedia). When I made the argument on
the discussion page most people were against it because they felt people
would
On 05/24/2010 01:41 AM, Ziko van Dijk wrote:
In German Wikipedia, our word gesichtet is a little bit strange.
Sichten is like spotting a rare animal in the wilderness.
That's funny. Internally, especially in technical discussions, sighted
gets used a fair bit. All this time I'd been
On 05/23/2010 07:56 PM, Alex wrote:
I think that fits in nicely with James Alexander's view: we can and
should assume that most editors have already checked their work. Not
against the minutiae of our rules, but against their own intent, and
their understanding of what constitutes an
Well, what James Alexander says - maybe we can make up something of
edit. Checked edit.
Ziko
2010/5/24 William Pietri will...@scissor.com:
On 05/24/2010 01:41 AM, Ziko van Dijk wrote:
In German Wikipedia, our word gesichtet is a little bit strange.
Sichten is like spotting a rare animal in the
On 05/23/2010 07:51 PM, David Levy wrote:
William Pietri wrote:
I think insiders will adjust to any name we choose, as some of our
existing names attest. So I think as long as the name isn't hideous or
actively misleading, then my main criterion is how it comes across to
novices. For
William Pietri wrote:
Sorry if I was unclear. I was speaking about the naming issue. I think
it's ok if our name for this generally assumes the happy case.
I disagree. I think that it should be as clear as possible that this
process exists to counter inappropriate edits, not as an Orwellian
David Levy wrote:
William Pietri wrote:
I know that these names have been worked over extensively by Jay and
Moka, who have a lot of experience dealing with reporters and the
general public. They were pretty happy with the two names that were part
of the initial proposal from Rob, so I am
Hoi,
Flagged Revisions is a MediaWiki extension that is used by many people on
the English Wikipedia. Not everyone uses the English language user
interface. Consequently when you decide to change them locally, all those
people will not understand what is going on.
Localisations are done at
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 7:30 PM, AGK wiki...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 22 May 2010 02:09, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
While that is true, making up names without any real thought is what
has resulted in the mess we have now where most people have no idea
what the differences
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 10:34 AM, David Levy lifeisunf...@gmail.com wrote:
So I think it's fine if the name has a positive connotation.
And that connotation should be we're countering inappropriate edits,
not we assume that everything's okay, but we'll humor the concerns.
Of course, I'm not
On 05/24/2010 07:34 AM, David Levy wrote:
Rob has explicitly asked us to comment on these names and set up a
forum in which to do so (and propose alternatives). You've vigorously
defended the name drawing the most opposition and declined to comment
on the name drawing the most support, and
On 05/24/2010 08:49 AM, Nathan wrote:
Edit check, review gap, review delay, check delay, wait approval,
content pause, review pause, second check, second approval, etc. There
are lots of possible names for this feature. Sometimes I worry that
the Foundation staff work for a company built upon
Michael Snow wrote:
You edited out the text William was replying to, but in expressing
his trust that the public relations professionals have the greatest
expertise as to how the general public will receive the terminology,
he was responding directly to speculation about how the general
On 05/24/2010 08:31 AM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
We could use a name which expresses_nothing_
about what is going on, thus making it clear that you can't figure it
out simply from the name.
That did cross my mind, and it was tempting. But practically, many busy
journalists, causal
On 05/24/2010 07:34 AM, David Levy wrote:
I disagree. I think that it should be as clear as possible that this
process exists to counter inappropriate edits, not as an Orwellian
measure intended to be used indiscriminately throughout the
encyclopedia (because we want to double check good
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 10:21 AM, William Pietri will...@scissor.comwrote:
That did cross my mind, and it was tempting. But practically, many busy
journalists, causal readers, and novice editors may base a lot of their
initial reaction on the name alone, or on related language in the
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Rob Lanphier ro...@robla.net wrote:
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 10:21 AM, William Pietri will...@scissor.comwrote:
That did cross my mind, and it was tempting. But practically, many busy
journalists, causal readers, and novice editors may base a lot of their
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Rob Lanphier ro...@robla.net wrote:
casual reader, it might as well be called the Hyperion Frobnosticating
Endoswitch. It will be a blank slate as far as journalists and the world
at
Hi Everyone -
Our next strategic planning office hours will be: 04:00-05:00 UTC,
Wednesday, 26 May. Local timezones can be checked at
http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?year=2010month=5day=26hour=04min=0sec=0p1=0
As always, you can access the chat by going to
I don't believe we should aim at a completely meaningless name out of
concern that some people may not get the finer details of what we try to
convey.
If we make that a rule for all features yet to be named we will again have
made our world a bit more impenetrable.
Remember how our 100+
Earlier:
If Mediawiki had been named Mediawiki Engine, and Wikimedia had been named
Wikimedia Organization, part of the current confusion for outsiders would
already have gone.
They may not understand from the name what kind of engine, of what kind of
organization, but they will have
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Rob Lanphier ro...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi everyone,
As William alluded to, a bunch of us have been studying the user interface
for Flagged Protections and figuring out how to make it more intuitive.
Thanks for asking about the name -- though I suspect there's
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
I support Hyperion Frobnosticating Endoswitch.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
Greetings,
I'm very excited to welcome Ryan Kaldari to the Wikimedia Foundation as the
Front End developer for fundraising. Ryan joins us from MTV Networks: Country
Music Television, where he worked as a web developer responsible for several
integration and architecture projects. Previous to
Awesome. I've met Ryan, this is great to hear.
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 8:09 PM, Tomasz Finc tf...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Greetings,
I'm very excited to welcome Ryan Kaldari to the Wikimedia Foundation as the
Front End developer for fundraising. Ryan joins us from MTV Networks:
Country Music
28 matches
Mail list logo
