|
|
|
Wikipedia:Pending changes |
|
|
TungstenCarbide |
|
Allegedly shot down by stray Ukrainian missile
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,405
Joined:
Member No.: 10,787
|
|
|
|
|
Malleus |
|
Fat Cat
Group: Contributors
Posts: 1,682
Joined:
From: United Kingdom
Member No.: 8,716
|
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Wed 16th June 2010, 1:22am) QUOTE(Malleus @ Tue 15th June 2010, 5:13pm) QUOTE(Ather @ Tue 15th June 2010, 11:40pm) Have you seen the rapidly expanding list of reviewers? There are some rum ones in there! Practising socks and assorted arseholes all over the place. I think I might apply (as a sock not an arsehole). What I'm finding extraordinary about this whole debacle is that so many seem to think that they're being trusted with a new right, whereas the truth is that they're grudgingly being allowed to keep a right that they already had until yesterday. Would somebody like to clue me on what these people do? If it involves reviewing IP-edits in some queue for articles that are sprotected, I'm certainly not playing. Personally, they can stay there in limbo forever, as far as I'm concerned. Does this in any way affect my ability to edit as a nameuser? Yes, it does. In a nutshell, if you don't have this new "right", then any edits you make may need to be approved by one of these "trusted" new reviewers before they're visible to the great unwashed.
|
|
|
|
Milton Roe |
|
Known alias of J. Random Troll
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined:
Member No.: 5,156
|
QUOTE(Malleus @ Tue 15th June 2010, 5:27pm) QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Wed 16th June 2010, 1:22am) QUOTE(Malleus @ Tue 15th June 2010, 5:13pm) QUOTE(Ather @ Tue 15th June 2010, 11:40pm) Have you seen the rapidly expanding list of reviewers? There are some rum ones in there! Practising socks and assorted arseholes all over the place. I think I might apply (as a sock not an arsehole). What I'm finding extraordinary about this whole debacle is that so many seem to think that they're being trusted with a new right, whereas the truth is that they're grudgingly being allowed to keep a right that they already had until yesterday. Would somebody like to clue me on what these people do? If it involves reviewing IP-edits in some queue for articles that are sprotected, I'm certainly not playing. Personally, they can stay there in limbo forever, as far as I'm concerned. Does this in any way affect my ability to edit as a nameuser? Yes, it does. In a nutshell, if you don't have this new "right", then any edits you make may need to be approved by one of these "trusted" new reviewers before they're visible to the great unwashed. Well, the page (link at the head of this thread) claims: Edits by autoconfirmed users (registered for four days, with ten edits) are automatically approved except in some rare cases. Well, what are these "rare cases"??
|
|
|
|
Subtle Bee |
|
melli fera, fera...
Group: Inactive
Posts: 340
Joined:
Member No.: 17,787
|
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Tue 15th June 2010, 5:22pm) Would somebody like to clue me on what these people do? If it involves reviewing IP-edits in some queue for articles that are sprotected, I'm certainly not playing. Personally, they can stay there in limbo forever, as far as I'm concerned.
Does this in any way affect my ability to edit as a nameuser?
yes, it seems so (I assume "Autoconfirmed" = nameuser): QUOTE Can edit; a new revision is available immediately, but not displayed by default until a reviewer or administrator accepts the edit.
I loved this explanation: QUOTE Reviewers are experienced users who are granted the ability to accept other user's edits on pages protected by pending changes. Reviewers are expected to have a minimal editing history, know what is and what is not vandalism and be familiar with basic content policies. More details are provided at Wikipedia:Reviewing#Becoming a reviewer.
Reviewer rights can be granted by administrators, at their discretion based on the above guidelines.
...given that, as of now, Jimbo's userpage still defiantly proclaims: QUOTE Statement of principles [...] For example: rather than trust humans to identify "regulars" correctly, we must use a simple, transparent, and open algorithm, so that people are automatically given full privileges once they have been around the community for a very short period of time. [...]"You can edit this page right now" is a core guiding check on everything that we do. We must respect this principle as sacred.
so, meh. This post has been edited by Subtle Bee:
|
|
|
|
Milton Roe |
|
Known alias of J. Random Troll
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined:
Member No.: 5,156
|
QUOTE(Malleus @ Tue 15th June 2010, 5:48pm) QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Wed 16th June 2010, 1:36am) QUOTE(Malleus @ Tue 15th June 2010, 5:27pm) QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Wed 16th June 2010, 1:22am) QUOTE(Malleus @ Tue 15th June 2010, 5:13pm) QUOTE(Ather @ Tue 15th June 2010, 11:40pm) Have you seen the rapidly expanding list of reviewers? There are some rum ones in there! Practising socks and assorted arseholes all over the place. I think I might apply (as a sock not an arsehole). What I'm finding extraordinary about this whole debacle is that so many seem to think that they're being trusted with a new right, whereas the truth is that they're grudgingly being allowed to keep a right that they already had until yesterday. Would somebody like to clue me on what these people do? If it involves reviewing IP-edits in some queue for articles that are sprotected, I'm certainly not playing. Personally, they can stay there in limbo forever, as far as I'm concerned. Does this in any way affect my ability to edit as a nameuser? Yes, it does. In a nutshell, if you don't have this new "right", then any edits you make may need to be approved by one of these "trusted" new reviewers before they're visible to the great unwashed. Well, the page (link at the head of this thread) claims: Edits by autoconfirmed users (registered for four days, with ten edits) are automatically approved except in some rare cases. Well, what are these "rare cases"?? Depends on who edited the article before you did, and on the level of this new protection that's been applied. There's a table somewhere that attempts to make it all a bit clearer. Cripes. Can't they just grandfather in people who've been editors for more than 2 years and have 10,000 edits or something? *%$# (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/furious.gif)
|
|
|
|
EricBarbour |
|
blah
Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined:
Member No.: 5,066
|
As expected, the bullshit is just getting cranked up. For example, the sweet and sexy Jeske Couriano demands that he be blocked, as a "protest". (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/yak.gif) QUOTE Just walk away. The project is determined to light itself afire over is flagged revisions business. Let it burn. Protonk (talk) 22:41, 14 June 2010 (UTC) No shit, smartboy. I can hear the syrupy violins already. This post has been edited by EricBarbour:
|
|
|
|
Ottava |
|
Ãœber Pokemon
Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,917
Joined:
Member No.: 7,328
|
QUOTE(Malleus @ Tue 15th June 2010, 9:02pm) QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Wed 16th June 2010, 1:56am) Cripes. Can't they just grandfather in people who've been editors for more than 2 years and have 10,000 edits or something? *%$# (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/furious.gif) That wouldn't be fit for purpose, because then you'd have no reason to be beholden to the administrators for allowing you to continue doing what you've been doing for years. I was rather bothered by Karanacs gracing Nancy Heise with the feature. The only reason why Karanacs would do that is to unsettle Nancy in a very stalkerish manner. Many other admin who have abused non-admin have done the same thing. I have to side with Malleus on this. Seeing crap like the above makes this just a means to harass and intimidate others. The only way to solve the BLP problem is to not have BLPs.
|
|
|
|
Milton Roe |
|
Known alias of J. Random Troll
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined:
Member No.: 5,156
|
QUOTE(Malleus @ Tue 15th June 2010, 6:02pm) QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Wed 16th June 2010, 1:56am) Cripes. Can't they just grandfather in people who've been editors for more than 2 years and have 10,000 edits or something? *%$# (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/furious.gif) That wouldn't be fit for purpose, because then you'd have no reason to be beholden to the administrators for allowing you to continue doing what you've been doing for years. Yes. Plus, why do anything by automation that your lackies can do in manual mode? It's like Chinese build-your-dam-with-shovels routine. Emperor Jimbo and his Coolies. The irony. This policy change is happening on a website where they refused to sprotect most articles, on grounds that they can't, since if IPs couldn't get instant gratification, they'd be so offended as not to edit rather than register (which takes very minimal effort). But now, they're planning to treat their senior editors that way! (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/huh.gif) (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/wacko.gif) And WHY are they doing this? Well, so that IP-anon users can still edit most articles and continue to get immediate gratification. I'm beginning to feel a sort of middle-class squeeze. Perhaps I need to resgister to be a reviewer, and then not review. (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/ermm.gif) The shear stupidity of the management of Wikipedia continues to boggle the mind.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
| |