On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 2:52 PM, Andrew Turvey<[email protected]> wrote:
<snip> >> 1) Is this going to apply to every page? > > No. People have been talking about all living person articles, although the > community may of course decide to roll it out to all articles in the future, > or indeed have it more restricted. The German Wikipedia applies in to every > page. Will it apply to talk page or other pages outside of articles if it was rolled out further? Does de-wiki have it apply to all pages in all namespaces? >> 2) Who gets to flag a revision? > > Members of the user group "Reviewer". All Admins will automatically be given > reviewer status and all other users will be able to apply for it at > [[WP:Request for permissions]]; like rollback there will be a presumed > threshold of number of edits and time since account was opened. An initial > poll rejected the idea of autopromotion, but I notice this issue has been > reopened because "only" 50 people participated in that discussion. To be fair, as more people become aware of this, there will be more calls for bigger and longer discussions. That is only natural. Rather then risks continual re-discussion, it should be made clear that everyone will get the chance to say something at the end of the trial. And if they don't, well, that will cause huge upset. > I think the idea was all entries with [[Category:Living persons]] would be > automatically flagged. This is one reason I asked for an edit filter to be set up to monitor how often people add and remove this category and how often vandals do this (either intentionally, or as part of another edit). Of course, once you have the flagged 'protection' in place, reviewers will be able to prevent removal of the category. But that is something to watch for. > There's a "working draft" at [[Wikipedia:Reviewing guideline]] which says you > can pass an edit if it doesn't contain any vandalism, patent nonsense, > copyvios, legal threats, personal attacks or libel. Basically, this is a high > level review, not intended to go into the details that you might get on a > talk page. Some of those items are difficult to sort out when only taking a brief look at the edit or article. Copyvios in particular can be hard to detect - I hope people are lenient on reviewers who let things slip through. In BLPs, copyvios can sometimes be the subject trying to upload something they have written previously (and not really intending to GFDL what they wrote). > Wikipedia needs to continue recruiting new contributors in order to keep its > current success. This has already been identified as a problem and flagged > revisions may make this worse. We need to address this risk. Both recruiting and *keeping* new contributors (i.e. welcoming them and helping them learn how to edit Wikipedia). Carcharoth _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
