[WikiEN-l] reviewing edits by anons

Thu Dec 15 01:09:41 UTC 2005

Hi,

>  The problem for users who see a long list of anon edits is 
> that they don't know if they are perfectly OK edits that have 
> been looked at by others and not thought to need correction 
> (hence the absence of usernic edits) or if they simply have 
> never been checked. All too often, faced with a massive list 

In other words: an article last edited by an anon is ambiguous: either
it hasn't been checked, or it has been checked and accepted.  However,
an article last edited by a user is equally bad: either it was checked
and fixed (reverted), checked and improved further, or wasn't checked
but improved in some other area (eg, typo, interwiki link etc). In other
words, Wiki lacks a way of rating/checking articles/changes.  I've often
thought it would be good to be able to comment on changes in the
history. Say an anon changes a population figure. I would like to flag
it and say "can someone check this", while making some unrelated change.
My unrelated change can easily bury their possibly malicious change....

Steve