[WikiEN-l] Fwd: Wikipedia reputation

Wed Mar 2 14:39:09 UTC 2005

Daniel Mayer wrote:

>Ack! No more blasted meta tages (meaning templates). A smarter system is needed
>that does not require an editor to edit or in any way change the content of an
>article by using said system. 
>  
>
Well, mav, we can flag for Confidence without any editor intervention by 
simply attaching our confidence in the saving editor to the article 
version.  Anon saves get low confidence, newbies get a little higher, 
etc.  But any other quality or other metric is going to have to be done 
by humans.

I personally would be delighted to see nothing more than a Confidence 
flag on articles so people could select for distribution or presentation 
based on Confidence.  That solves at least the problem of burning a CD 
with some percentage of vandalized articles, or articles that do not 
represent "the best we can do at the moment".  We could even show anons 
high-confidence articles only, and tell them when they click "Edit", 
"Hey, you weren't really looking at the latest version.  Here's the 
latest and the diff. Edit it.  If it's been trashed, go into History to 
edit and save as the latest the version you were viewing."

Tom Haws
"And [the angel] said unto me: Knowest thou the condescension of God? 
And I said unto him: I know that he loveth his children; nevertheless, I 
do not know the meaning of all things."