William Pietri wrote:
At the end, if there is no decision to extend
the trial or to permanently adopt Pending Changes, the community will
probably need to go and switch all Pending Changes articles to something
else. (Unless they'd like us just to switch them en masse to, say,
On 15 June 2010 01:12, William Pietri will...@scissor.com wrote:
On 06/14/2010 09:56 PM, Risker wrote:
If there is no intention at this time to stop the trial and
deactivate the extension on August 15th, I'd like the WMF and the
developers
to say so now.
This is, as the community
To Risker:
*Edits by reviewers to articles with pending changes are automatically
accepted.
NO, the reviewer has to manually accept the new revision, and you could have
asked **before** creating this mountain of drama and FUD on enwiki, or
tested the configuration yourself, or read the
Cenarium sysop wrote:
To Risker:
*Pending changes will help to reduce visibility of vandalism and BLP
violations
Yes, classic protection is way too rigid for Wikipedia today, and has always
been too rigid. The flexibility of pending changes protection will allow to
use protection where
On 15 June 2010 02:38, Cenarium sysop cenarium.sy...@gmail.com wrote:
To Risker:
*Edits by reviewers to articles with pending changes are automatically
accepted.
NO, the reviewer has to manually accept the new revision, and you could
have
asked **before** creating this mountain of drama
BBC News have just run their story on this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/10312095.stm
Mike
On 15 Jun 2010, at 00:22, David Gerard wrote:
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/wikipedia_to_loosen_controls_tonight.php
Spotted by Nihiltres.
- d.
On 15 Jun 2010, at 00:39, Risker wrote:
On 14 June 2010 19:22, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/wikipedia_to_loosen_controls_tonight.php
Spotted by Nihiltres.
groan
The George Bush page is not going to be part of this trial, because
Hi all,
since there's already several million iPad (and soon, other tablet)
users out there, I thought I'd try one in the Apple store to see what
Wikipedia looks/feels like. Generally, I think it's very nice, with
one exception. In portrait mode, the sidebar takes up a lot of real
estate.
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 2:01 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
cimonav...@gmail.com wrote:
William Pietri wrote:
At the end, if there is no decision to extend
the trial or to permanently adopt Pending Changes, the community will
probably need to go and switch all Pending Changes articles to something
On 15 June 2010 09:54, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote:
From a media contact point of view: one of the first things the media want
are examples
where it will be used, which is somewhat of a difficult question to answer
when a) the
community hasn't made its mind up, and b) even if it
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 6:59 PM, David Goodman dgoodma...@gmail.com wrote:
There has never been agreement for more than the 2,000. It will be
Wha?
The 2000 limit was a technical thing which came later, and not from
the community.
I don't think it's a bad thing, even outside of the simple
On 15/06/2010, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonav...@gmail.com wrote:
*Pending changes will help with disputes.
No, and it was clearly stated in the proposal, and now clearly stated in
the
trial policy (scope section), that pending changes protection, level 1 or
2,
should not be used on pages
Can you please identify methods in which we can measure the improvement
here? Are you proposing, even before the trial starts, to start including
articles that do not meet the criteria for page protection? Let's be
clear,
Cenarium; the trial is very specifically only to be used on pages
Dear en.wiki-l,
As some of you may have seen in this week's Wikipedia Signpost[1] or on the
Wikimedia UK Blog[2] the British Museum is offering five prizes of £100
(≈$140USD/€120) at their shop/bookshop[3] for new Featured Articles on
topics related to the British Museum *in any Wikipedia
From NetworkWorld.com, which I'm not sure they're painting a more
positive or more negative picutre of pending changes:
http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/62518
-MuZemike
On 6/14/2010 8:46 PM, Ian Woollard wrote:
On 15/06/2010, MuZemikemuzem...@gmail.com wrote:
Have there been
On 15 June 2010 11:51, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk wrote:
On 15 June 2010 09:54, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote:
From a media contact point of view: one of the first things the media want
are examples
where it will be used, which is somewhat of a difficult question to answer
On 15 June 2010 04:54, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote:
On 15 Jun 2010, at 00:39, Risker wrote:
On 14 June 2010 19:22, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/wikipedia_to_loosen_controls_tonight.php
Spotted by Nihiltres.
groan
On 15 June 2010 19:15, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm actually becoming increasingly concerned that the notion that the
[[George W. Bush]] article would be unlocked has to be coming from somewhere
within the organization, since it's being repeated in every single article
in the press.
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
On 15 June 2010 19:15, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
The objective of this trial isn't to give us good press, it's to persuade
the community that this is a useful and viable tool.
I couldn't disagree more. The
On 15 June 2010 19:52, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
Though I wouldn't recommend trying it _first_ nor would I recommend
trying it while the press is talking about. Perhaps it would be an
intolerable train wreak only because the press is spreading the name
of that article around.
On 15 June 2010 14:54, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk wrote:
On 15 June 2010 19:52, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
Though I wouldn't recommend trying it _first_ nor would I recommend
trying it while the press is talking about. Perhaps it would be an
intolerable train
On 15 Jun 2010, at 19:15, Risker wrote:
On 15 June 2010 04:54, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote:
From a media contact point of view: one of the first things the media want
are examples where it will be used, which is somewhat of a difficult
question to answer when a) the community
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 3:50 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, part of the objective here is to see whether we get enough
encyclopedia-worthy edits to determine if it is worthwhile removing
protection.
[snip]
I couldn't disagree more strongly. If we were making a judgement on
the
Just wanted to give everybody a quick update on Pending Changes.
Basically, it looks like we're in good shape for going live on the
English Wikipedia shortly.
We rolled the new code yesterday afternoon Pacific time. We've had a few
hiccups, but everything seems well in hand. The biggest issue
I thought these lists were subscribed to the announcements list, but
apparently not. Apologies if a duplicate turns up later.
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
Imagine an article with many revisions and pending changes enabled:
A, B, C, D, E, F, G...
A is an approved edit. B,C,D,E,F,G are all pending edits.
B is horrible vandalism that the subsequent edits did not fix.
You are a reviewer, you go to review page by clicking a pending review
link. On
Hmm... Forwarding messages as attachments clearly doesn't work, either.
Perhaps the third time will be the charm. Sorry for the mess.
William
Original Message
Subject:Pending Changes launched on English Wikipedia
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 19:03:40 -0700
From:
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 11:05 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
Imagine an article with many revisions and pending changes enabled:
A, B, C, D, E, F, G...
[snip]
I don't know how to fix this. We could remove the reject button to
make it more clear that you use the normal editing
As I understand it, and apologies if mistaken, all of this is based on a
misunderstanding of the tool.
A reviewer faced with any mix of edits and wishing to do something (ie not
ignore it all) has two main choices.
They can accept the most recent edit, or they can add an edit of their own
(which
The crux of this issue is that to revert individual edits one has to go to
the page history, the pending changes review window does not permit this.
Gmaxwell and I have worked out a step-by-step process for even the least
technical reviewer to follow. You can find it here:
30 matches
Mail list logo
