Mailing List Archive: Wikipedia: Foundation

Re: [Wikitech-l] flagged revisions

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

thepmaccount at gmail

Jun 19, 2009, 3:47 PM

Post #1 of 7 (679 views)
Permalink

Re: [Wikitech-l] flagged revisions

Hi all,
It's been 10 days since the last note on flagged revisions, which is
sufficiently important to warrant a follow up at this point in my view. I'll
try and focus the questions a bit in order not to pester, but with the
intention of helping things forward;
see https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18244 for bug details.
* Flagged Revisions is approved for use on the English Wikipedia, my
understanding is that there really isn't that much technical work still to
do on the extension - is this true?
* Is there anything a regular editor such as myself can do to help
prioritise this in the hearts, minds and fingers of our wonderful
developers?
* Personally, I believe this function to be one of the most important
matters before the foundation currently, I further believe that this view is
relatively widely held (and sure, widely reviled too - but this is a wiki,
right!) - I've copied foundation-l in on this note with the intention of
further general discussion occurring there, and bug-specific chat only on
the wiki-tech list, I hope this is an appropriate use of resources :-)
I've offered appreciation, a dollop of charm, and a little bit of money to
try and keep this moving forward.... I'm not sure I'm above offering sex, so
please throw me a bone for the sake of the decorum of these lists, if
nothing else :-)
best,
Peter,
PM.

On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell [at] gmail>wrote:

> Am I confused or didn't enwp approved flagged revisions, but then it
> was held up due to "purely technical reasons" ... what is this crap
> now?
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: K. Peachey <p858snake [at] yahoo>
> Date: Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 10:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] flagged revisions
> To: Wikimedia developers <wikitech-l [at] lists>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 12:08 PM, private musings<thepmaccount [at] gmail>
> wrote:
> > with apologies for re-vitalising a slightly old thread -I have a couple
> of
> > follow ups, which it'd be great to try and make some progress on....
> > My understanding is that Aaron (whom I haven't 'met' - so hello!) has
> > completed work on a test configuration of flagged revisions - I hope it's
> > appropraite for me to ask directly on this list whether or not Aaron
> > considers this development complete? (my understanding is that the
> extension
> > is pretty much ready to go?)
> > There is understandably considerable interest in the timeframe for
> > installing flagged revisions, I would hope it would be a positive step to
> > set some timeframes a bit tighter than 'hopefully by wikimedia' ;-) - is
> > this list an appropriate context for such discusison, and if so
> (hopefullly)
> > - could someone appropriately empowered flesh out the next steps a bit
> more,
> > and maybe try and establish a timetable of sorts?
> > My intention in posting about this every so often is to ensure that such
> an
> > important development doesn't sort of slip through the cracks - I think
> > communication on this matter has to date been ok, but not great - it'll
> be
> > cool to improve it a bit :-)
> > cheers,
> > Peter,
> > PM.
> The implementations depend on a per wiki basis depending on consensus,
> for example, wikinews and a few others such as the German Wikipedia
> already run it.
>
> The en.wiki is currently also looking at a slightly modified version
> nicked named "Flagged Protections" which is basically designed to work
> the same way protection does, articles are only covered by it when
> protected to a certain level.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l [at] lists
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

meta.sj at gmail

Jun 19, 2009, 10:33 PM

Post #2 of 7 (641 views)
Permalink

Re: [Wikitech-l] flagged revisions [In reply to]

I agree this is important, to the projects and to the progress of flagged
revs as a concept (which is still one step of a long journey). It is worth
a quick thread on f-l for that reason if not for general interest.

Sj

samuel klein. sj [at] laptop +1 617 529 4266

On Jun 19, 2009 6:47 PM, "private musings" <thepmaccount [at] gmail> wrote:

Hi all,
It's been 10 days since the last note on flagged revisions, which is
sufficiently important to warrant a follow up at this point in my view. I'll
try and focus the questions a bit in order not to pester, but with the
intention of helping things forward;
see https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18244 for bug details.
* Flagged Revisions is approved for use on the English Wikipedia, my
understanding is that there really isn't that much technical work still to
do on the extension - is this true?
* Is there anything a regular editor such as myself can do to help
prioritise this in the hearts, minds and fingers of our wonderful
developers?
* Personally, I believe this function to be one of the most important
matters before the foundation currently, I further believe that this view is
relatively widely held (and sure, widely reviled too - but this is a wiki,
right!) - I've copied foundation-l in on this note with the intention of
further general discussion occurring there, and bug-specific chat only on
the wiki-tech list, I hope this is an appropriate use of resources :-)
I've offered appreciation, a dollop of charm, and a little bit of money to
try and keep this moving forward.... I'm not sure I'm above offering sex, so
please throw me a bone for the sake of the decorum of these lists, if
nothing else :-)
best,
Peter,
PM.

On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell [at] gmail>wrote:

> Am I confused or didn't enwp approved flagged revisions, but then it
> was held up due to "purely technical reasons" ... what is this crap
> now?
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: K. Peachey <p858snake [at] yahoo>
> Date: Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 10:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] flagged revisions
> To: Wikimedia developers <wikitech-l [at] lists>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 12:08 PM, private musings<thepmaccount [at] gmail>
> wrote:
> > with apologies for re-vitalising a slightly old thread -I have a couple
> of
> > follow ups, which it'd be great to try and make some progress on....
> > My understanding is that Aaron (whom I haven't 'met' - so hello!) has
> > completed work on a test configuration of flagged revisions - I hope
it's
> > appropraite for me to ask directly on this list whether or not Aaron
> > considers this development complete? (my understanding is that the
> extension
> > is pretty much ready to go?)
> > There is understandably considerable interest in the timeframe for
> > installing flagged revisions, I would hope it would be a positive step
to
> > set some timeframes a bit tighter than 'hopefully by wikimedia' ;-) - is
> > this list an appropriate context for such discusison, and if so
> (hopefullly)
> > - could someone appropriately empowered flesh out the next steps a bit
> more,
> > and maybe try and establish a timetable of sorts?
> > My intention in posting about this every so often is to ensure that such
> an
> > important development doesn't sort of slip through the cracks - I think
> > communication on this matter has to date been ok, but not great - it'll
> be
> > cool to improve it a bit :-)
> > cheers,
> > Peter,
> > PM.
> The implementations depend on a per wiki basis depending on consensus,
> for example, wikinews and a few others such as the German Wikipedia
> already run it.
>
> The en.wiki is currently also looking at a slightly modified version
> nicked named "Flagged Protections" which is basically designed to work
> the same way protection does, articles are only covered by it when
> protected to a certain level.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l [at] lists
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

cimonavaro at gmail

Jun 20, 2009, 10:42 PM

Post #3 of 7 (625 views)
Permalink

Re: [Wikitech-l] flagged revisions [In reply to]

Samuel Klein wrote:
> I agree this is important, to the projects and to the progress of flagged
> revs as a concept (which is still one step of a long journey). It is worth
> a quick thread on f-l for that reason if not for general interest.
>
>
I was so taken aback by the conceit that the adoption of one
single extension by a single language in a single project might
be of interest on a foundation level, that I didn't reply directly,
but decided to think hard about whether there is anything at
all about flagged revs that might be of foundation level relevance.

I was in fact mildly surprised to find that I could conceive of one
such issue. And that issue is what limits should we set on the
size of wikipedia projects to whom we will _allow_ setting up
of flagged revs. The leading programmer of flagged revs has
suggested 100 000 articles in the wikipedia context (smaller
sizes ok for instance in wikisource contexts).

But since wikipedia is nearest my heart, that is what I will
focus on here.

My thinking suggests that 100 000 should be the hard lower
limit; below which size, there would have to be extraordinarily
strong and exceptional circumstances where flagged revs could
conceivably be allowed. Do bear in mind that flagged revs is
labour intensive, and bestows very little benefit in the early
stages when emphasis is getting just any content at all up there,
and use by readers is not really that intensive, nor is there much
media interest yet, nor the general public that involved.

My thinking is that it should be strongly discouraged that flagged
revs be used on wikipedias below 250 000 articles, before that
size community building and content creation should be key, not
worrying about the face the wikipedia presents to the outside
world.

But on the other end of the spectrum, on projects like the one
I am active on (the Finnish Wikipedia)...

Disruptive behaviour is not wired into our genes or our
culture, but quietly co�perative behaviour has been. Our
wikipedia is a paradise in comparison to many. For this
reason personally I would consider it a great shame if
we were to be granted flagged revs before say 750 000
or one million. And even as I say this, I know there are
the chance brothers (Fat and Slim) that this devout wish
will be observed. I consider it a great problem that
solutions for problems larger wikis have are nearly
without exception foisted on smaller wikis without much
consideration of what their real effect there will be, and
are they really ready for it.

Yours,

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

putevod at mccme

Jun 21, 2009, 3:21 AM

Post #4 of 7 (624 views)
Permalink

Re: [Wikitech-l] flagged revisions [In reply to]

> But on the other end of the spectrum, on projects like the one
> I am active on (the Finnish Wikipedia)...
>
> Disruptive behaviour is not wired into our genes or our
> culture, but quietly co?perative behaviour has been. Our
> wikipedia is a paradise in comparison to many. For this
> reason personally I would consider it a great shame if
> we were to be granted flagged revs before say 750 000
> or one million. And even as I say this, I know there are
> the chance brothers (Fat and Slim) that this devout wish
> will be observed. I consider it a great problem that
> solutions for problems larger wikis have are nearly
> without exception foisted on smaller wikis without much
> consideration of what their real effect there will be, and
> are they really ready for it.
>
Could you may be motivate your opinion? Are you saying that there are no
vandals on fi.wp (which I can buy) and that novices on fi.wp first read
the rules and learn them by heart, and only then start creating articles?

Cheers
Yaroslav

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

cimonavaro at gmail

Jun 21, 2009, 7:39 PM

Post #5 of 7 (612 views)
Permalink

Re: [Wikitech-l] flagged revisions [In reply to]

Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote:
>> But on the other end of the spectrum, on projects like the one
>> I am active on (the Finnish Wikipedia)...
>>
>> Disruptive behaviour is not wired into our genes or our
>> culture, but quietly co?perative behaviour has been. Our
>> wikipedia is a paradise in comparison to many. For this
>> reason personally I would consider it a great shame if
>> we were to be granted flagged revs before say 750 000
>> or one million. And even as I say this, I know there are
>> the chance brothers (Fat and Slim) that this devout wish
>> will be observed. I consider it a great problem that
>> solutions for problems larger wikis have are nearly
>> without exception foisted on smaller wikis without much
>> consideration of what their real effect there will be, and
>> are they really ready for it.
>>
>>
> Could you may be motivate your opinion? Are you saying that there are no
> vandals on fi.wp (which I can buy) and that novices on fi.wp first read
> the rules and learn them by heart, and only then start creating articles?
>
>

No, that is definitely *not* what I am saying. Admins on the
Finnish wikipedia have on the occasion had to go to the
lengths of blocking whole grammar schools from editing.

What I *am* saying - and I suspect none of my countrymen
would dispute me in this - is that in Finland vandals are
vastly overrun by people of good faith editing and cleaning
after the vandals. So much so that the vandals effect is
easily negligible. Negligible over the long term, but also negligible
in the moment.

And thus, flaggedrevs would not provide nearly any added
disincentive for vandals, but would add workload for the
good faith editors, and slow down content production.

Yours,

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

putevod at mccme

Jun 22, 2009, 12:45 AM

Post #6 of 7 (614 views)
Permalink

Re: [Wikitech-l] flagged revisions [In reply to]

> What I *am* saying - and I suspect none of my countrymen
> would dispute me in this - is that in Finland vandals are
> vastly overrun by people of good faith editing and cleaning
> after the vandals. So much so that the vandals effect is
> easily negligible. Negligible over the long term, but also negligible
> in the moment.
>
> And thus, flaggedrevs would not provide nearly any added
> disincentive for vandals, but would add workload for the
> good faith editors, and slow down content production.
>
>
We are running flagged revisions on ru.wp for a year and a half now (250K
articles when started, 400K now), and even though the community was pretty
much sceptical in the beginning, now only a couple of vocal critics
remain. To my experience, the main problem with flagged revisions is not
so much vandalism which indeed gets reverted immediately but massive
copyright violations. If an anonymous user has introduced a piece of 10K
text in an article which has previously been 5K by a single edit this is
always a point of concern. Checking whether this text violates copyright
can easily take half an hour or more. Checking an old article can take two
hours. Introducing flagged revisions one actually avoids the situation
when several active editors spend their time for doing the same work.

Cheers
Yaroslav

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

zvandijk at googlemail

Jun 22, 2009, 1:17 AM

Post #7 of 7 (609 views)
Permalink

Re: [Wikitech-l] flagged revisions [In reply to]

>
>
> And thus, flaggedrevs would not provide nearly any added
> disincentive for vandals, but would add workload for the
> good faith editors, and slow down content production.
>
>
> Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
>
>
This is not likely to happen. Our experiences on de.WP show that the change
in the work process(es) is minimal. Editing is not really different, and it
seems that vandalism is not less than before.
The extra work (for the first sighting) was done in a couple of months, and
combed out some old vandalism and in general made us improving a lot of old
articles to meet minimal requirements.
But the important thing is: Vandalism (from simple profanity to calls for
murder (!) ) does not appear immediately to the readers, and we can keep our
wiki principle reducing its negative consequences.
Kind regards
Ziko

--
Ziko van Dijk
NL-Silvolde
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads