Interesting. I see that you opened the task for the user-right, but this is
a result of a decision to make a catch-all fix for several problems. I
think the capcha problem is extremely annoying and goes way beyond the
scope of the one-off edit-a-thon, so this specific issue should have its
own task number. "Tame admins" are rarely on tap so not a solution for the
user-right but does the throttle override work now? I can't see where that
fix is confirmed anywhere.

On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 2:54 PM, WereSpielChequers <
werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm tempted to point out that this mainly affects new editors who cite
> their edits, other new editors will get bitten in other ways. But the
> internet is not the best venue for irony.
>
> More practically, if you have a tame admin on tap then you can reduce this
> and other problems at editathons by setting those new accounts as
> "confirmed". And yes I know we also have a shortage of admins, and also
> that it is likely that only a tiny proportion of the editors we lose
> through this are at editathons.
>
> Earlier this year as a result of the glam organisers event in Paris I made
> a proposal at bugzilla for an event organisers useright. This would have
> allowed us to circumvent this problem at those editathons that are targeted
> at newbies, and it got widely endorsed by GLAM editors from several
> languages. Sadly it got marked as resolved because there was something that
> looked similar to developers, though not of course to potential users. If
> anyone here knows how to bypass phabricator or how to mark a phabricator
> request as unresolved and still much wanted, then the link is
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T91928 alternatively perhaps we could
> persuade the education community to endorse it, it should be just as useful
> to them and they seem to have more clout with the WMF than the GLAM
> community.
>
> As for whether the capcha is useful in keeping out spammers, remember
> there are two capcha steps, one when you open a new account and the other
> when you use that to add links. Presumably any spam program that can pass
> the first hurdle can pass the second. But for new good faith human editors
> each capcha is a possible lost edit/editor. It would be good to test
> dropping the capcha requirement for adding new links, alternatively perhaps
> we could whitelist certain domains as likely to be reliable sources and
> unlikely to be spam.
>
> Regards
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to