Hey Erik,

I'm glad to see that we're imagining similar things.  :)  This project has
been on my to-do list for years.

I don't think that building a well-designed service and starting in labs
are conflicting options.  Regardless this project is marching forward in
the next couple of months.  I don't think we're breaking any new ground
conceptually.  Really, we're just building a feature extractor, gathering
hand-coded revisions and training a standard classifier.  Effective
strategies for doing all of these things are well described in the
literature and demonstrated in STiki.

Lila, your proposal seems to be orthogonal to the project I proposed in the
grant.  Petr, the developer/maintainer of the current version of Huggle,
has been calling for such a service as you describe for years.  See
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/wiki/wikitech/392727?do=post_view_threaded#392727

-Aaron

On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 11:52 PM, Kevin Wayne Williams <
[email protected]> wrote:

> I suspect it isn't done because it isn't a very good way to modify a
> complex embedded base of software, Lila. Generally, when modifying a
> complex embedded base, one designs first, iterates implementation and
> internal testing, and then releases a relatively complete piece of
> functionality.
>
> KWW
>
> Lila Tretikov schreef op 2014/11/08 12:37:
>
>  We seem to really gravitate towards complexity on these things. How can we
>> make them simple, addressing a very specific need. We can complicate
>> later.
>>
>> Here is a scenario (which we should start with, not architecture)
>>
>>
>>     1. As an editor I'd like to flag a revision as reviewed/verified by me
>>     from the revision screen or list.
>>     2. As an editor I want to see which revisions were verified/had second
>>     opinion by other editors.
>>
>> *So instead of a long spec that attempts to solve for a ton of cases,
>> let's
>> start thinking about solving simple, direct pain-points, iteratively.*
>>
>> Can we do that?
>>
>> L
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 8:40 PM, Erik Moeller <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>  On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Gabriel Wicke <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>  What are the indexing requirements for this metadata? If fast access by
>>>> specific properties is needed
>>>>
>>> Most typically, I'm guessing you'd do stuff on a per-revision basis to
>>> show quality indicators and such on page histories or article pages
>>> via opt-in gadgets. Querying the entire corpus for articles with
>>> certain characteristics would be valuable though, especially for
>>> applications like offline exports.
>>>
>>> I just saw
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Revision_scoring_as_a_service
>>> and wasn't even aware of that when I wrote the email -- there's
>>> definitely a lot of interest in a generic solution for this problem.
>>>
>>> Erik
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Erik Möller
>>> VP of Product & Strategy, Wikimedia Foundation
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikitech-l mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>>>
>>>  _______________________________________________
>> Wikitech-l mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Reply via email to