On Sep 27, 2013 5:06 PM, "Bartosz Dziewoński" <matma....@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 11:51:34 +0200, Petr Bena <benap...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> We are getting somewhere else than I wanted... I didn't want to >> discuss what should be reverted on sight or not. Problem is that right >> now lot of vandal-fighters see certain amount of dubious edits they >> skip because they can't verify if they are correct or not, which are >> then ignored and get lost in editing history. That's a fact. This >> problem could be easily solved if these specific edits could be >> highlighted somehow so that they would get attention of people who >> understand the topic well enough to check if they are OK. But there is >> no such a system / mechanism that would allow us to do that. I think >> this is worth of implementing somehow because it could significantly >> improve the reliability of encyclopedia content. There is a lot of >> vandalism that remains unnoticed even for months > > > Really, you have just described FlaggedRevs. It could be enabled by default for all articles and would solve all of your problems. Many large Wikipedias already use it, including pl.wp and de.wp.
And en.wp does has Pending Changes enabled. It would be great to have dev resources thrown at improving it to resolve the issues preventing wider use. All wikis have abuse filters, which provides tagging of suspicious edits. That extension has lots of bus and feature requests against it; fixing them will make it more flexible. Does huggle make use of the abuse filter tags? -- John Vandenberg _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
