On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Carcharoth <[email protected]> wrote: > You can out a date limiter on that URL so it won't become outdated. This one > should work indefinitely (unless some of the edits get deleted): > > http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Gwern&offset=201205301826&limit=100&target=Gwern
Neat. I didn't know we could do that. On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Carcharoth <[email protected]> wrote: > PS. You didn't have to spam links to your 'experiment' in the revert > edit summaries, you know. Some good-faith editors may get upset by > that. I disagree. The edit summary box is far too short to include any real explanation, so a link to the full explanation is best. The other alternative is to include no explanation in any form, and I regard that as unacceptable - people should know why some an apparently useless edit and revert were done. > The edit summary was: > > "rv test of editors for this page; you failed. see > http://www.gwern.net/In%20Defense%20Of%20Inclusionism#sins-of-omission-experiment-2"; > > This is something else that could have benefitted from outside input. > Some of the attitude you have towards all this rolls off the page, > with phrases such as "perhaps editors collectively know that putting a > link into a section named ‘External Links’ is painting a cross-hair on > its forehead". I should pretend I have no point of view and I am disinterested while somehow not being uninterested? Academics may have to adopt such an imposture, but I do not. As long as my 'snark' does not change the results - as it does not - I do not care. > My view is that if such experiments are to be carried > out, it would be better if they were designed and conducted by those > able to restrain themselves from such snark. Better how? -- gwern http://www.gwern.net _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
