masti wrote: > On 01/18/2011 12:30 AM, Lars Aronsson wrote: >> On 01/17/2011 11:36 PM, masti wrote: >>> what is the reason and what it can bring to the community? >> >> I tried to describe this. The task of finding out the >> history of a part of an article is very time consuming >> for long articles with a long history, where you have >> to manually look through lots of revisions that aren't >> related to the part of the article you are interested in. >> >> I took as the example the part of the flat geography >> of the city of Paris. Was this part controversial? Who >> edited it? Has it changed? When and by whom? >> >> Most edits to the article Paris are probably related to >> new elections, new buildings, new institutions. Most >> edits have nothing to do with the flat geography. >> So could the history view of maybe 5000 edits >> be quickly reduced down to 50 edits or even 5? >> >> > In this rare situation it could be beneficial, but does it really make > sense in general? Workload and complication of interface, in my opinion, > is not worth it. > > masti
I think it makes sense, but more as an external tool which selected them for you. There are tools like http://wikipedia.ramselehof.de/wikiblame.php which aim to do these things, but although I don't think they are so good, they may be a good place to start. _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
