[Wikitech-l] Technical advice on expert review?
BMJ, the publishers of the *British Medical Journal* and other top-tier biomedical journals, have kindly recruited the best minds they can get to review the en.Wikipedia's article, "Parkinson's disease". We began the review by passing the article, in a Word document, from one reviewer to the next by email. Each made proposed changes to the article text and left comments in the document, using Word's "Review" and "Track changes" features. At that point we needed to start a discussion, and Word isn't ideal for that. So I pasted the relevant paragraphs from the Word document into the left column of a wiki table, and the reviewers' comments into the right column, where the discussion could happen. [1] I manually applied background colours to distinguish deletions from additions in the left column, using . That discussion has now begun but one of the many things I've learned during all this is, the top researchers and theorists spend a lot of time in the air (travelling to conferences, lectures, meetings), and it is then, free from the demands of job and family, when they do their reviewing. So, I have pasted that wiki table into Word and have made it available to the reviewers here: [2]. Now they can download a copy before they get on a flight, and email it back to me with their comments when they're online again, and I'll transcribe their comments into the wiki table for discussion. This may be as simple as it gets but I just thought I'd put this before you, in case you may have thoughts on a better technical approach for next time. (BMJ have offered to do more of these.) I'm finding the construction of the wiki table tedious (particularly highlighting the deletions and additions) though I'm getting faster, and transcribing offline comments from the Word document into the wiki table will be a small chore. The wiki table pastes easily into Word with highlighting and formatting intact, but not vice versa. (I've also asked at Village pump (technical).) Any thoughts on making this easier or smarter would be much appreciated. Anthony Cole 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Anthonyhcole/sandbox 2. https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?resid=C1FF29217E209194!2141=file%2cdocx=Word=!AFGj7fd2K4v7N5o ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] changing edit summaries
(Sorry, I posted this in the wrong thread a few minutes ago.) On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 9:57 PM, Yusuke Matsubara whym at whym.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l wrote: ** On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 9:15 PM, Amir E. Aharoni *** amir.aharoni at mail.huji.ac.il https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l wrote: ** I tried looking for it in Bugzilla; I expected to find a two-digit bug for ** it, but I couldn't find any at all. Of course it's possible that I didn't ** look well enough. ** A bit different, but there is an extension that enables ** supplementing additional non-modifiable edit summaries: ** https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:RevisionCommentSupplement https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:RevisionCommentSupplement ** It was contributed (without a Bugzilla request) by Burthsceh, a ** volunteer at Japanese Wikipedia, prompted by the necessity to fix ** attributions made in edit summaries (for reused texts). [1] I don't ** think it has been extensively reviewed, though. ** With that approach, you could effectively modify an edit summary by ** appending a modified one and rev-deleting the original one. ** [1] https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:%E4%BA%95%E6%88%B8%E7%AB%AF/subj/%E5%B1%A5%E6%AD%B4%E3%83%9A%E3%83%BC%E3%82%B8%E3%81%AE%E5%80%8B%E3%80%85%E3%81%AE%E7%89%88%E3%81%AB%E5%AF%BE%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6%E8%BF%BD%E5%8A%A0%E3%81%AE%E3%82%B3%E3%83%A1%E3%83%B3%E3%83%88%E3%82%92%E8%A1%A8%E7%A4%BA%E3%81%99%E3%82%8B%E6%96%B9%E6%B3%95%E3%81%AE%E5%B0%8E%E5%85%A5%E3%81%AE%E6%8F%90%E6%A1%88 https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:%E4%BA%95%E6%88%B8%E7%AB%AF/subj/%E5%B1%A5%E6%AD%B4%E3%83%9A%E3%83%BC%E3%82%B8%E3%81%AE%E5%80%8B%E3%80%85%E3%81%AE%E7%89%88%E3%81%AB%E5%AF%BE%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6%E8%BF%BD%E5%8A%A0%E3%81%AE%E3%82%B3%E3%83%A1%E3%83%B3%E3%83%88%E3%82%92%E8%A1%A8%E7%A4%BA%E3%81%99%E3%82%8B%E6%96%B9%E6%B3%95%E3%81%AE%E5%B0%8E%E5%85%A5%E3%81%AE%E6%8F%90%E6%A1%88 * On Wed Nov 12 01:05:26 UTC 2014 I asked this list if the technical team could help the patrollers of recent changes to Wikipedia's medical articles “...tag the log entry of revisions ... as having been reviewed for policy/guideline compliance by a trusted editor.” [1] I am quite technically illiterate and may have misunderstood, but judging by Yusuke Matsubara's description, the extension he mentions above seems like it might fit our needs. Will it enable patrollers to add a comment to the edit summary? Does anyone know if it works on en.Wikipedia? 1.https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2014-November/079418.html Anthony Cole http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Anthonyhcole ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Release candidate for 1.24.0
Ignore my last post - I appended it to the wrong thread. Anthony Cole http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Anthonyhcole ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Release candidate for 1.24.0
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 9:57 PM, Yusuke Matsubara whym at whym.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l wrote: * On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 9:15 PM, Amir E. Aharoni ** amir.aharoni at mail.huji.ac.il https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l wrote: ** I tried looking for it in Bugzilla; I expected to find a two-digit bug for ** it, but I couldn't find any at all. Of course it's possible that I didn't ** look well enough. ** A bit different, but there is an extension that enables ** supplementing additional non-modifiable edit summaries: ** https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:RevisionCommentSupplement https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:RevisionCommentSupplement ** It was contributed (without a Bugzilla request) by Burthsceh, a ** volunteer at Japanese Wikipedia, prompted by the necessity to fix ** attributions made in edit summaries (for reused texts). [1] I don't ** think it has been extensively reviewed, though. ** With that approach, you could effectively modify an edit summary by ** appending a modified one and rev-deleting the original one. ** [1] https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:%E4%BA%95%E6%88%B8%E7%AB%AF/subj/%E5%B1%A5%E6%AD%B4%E3%83%9A%E3%83%BC%E3%82%B8%E3%81%AE%E5%80%8B%E3%80%85%E3%81%AE%E7%89%88%E3%81%AB%E5%AF%BE%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6%E8%BF%BD%E5%8A%A0%E3%81%AE%E3%82%B3%E3%83%A1%E3%83%B3%E3%83%88%E3%82%92%E8%A1%A8%E7%A4%BA%E3%81%99%E3%82%8B%E6%96%B9%E6%B3%95%E3%81%AE%E5%B0%8E%E5%85%A5%E3%81%AE%E6%8F%90%E6%A1%88 https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:%E4%BA%95%E6%88%B8%E7%AB%AF/subj/%E5%B1%A5%E6%AD%B4%E3%83%9A%E3%83%BC%E3%82%B8%E3%81%AE%E5%80%8B%E3%80%85%E3%81%AE%E7%89%88%E3%81%AB%E5%AF%BE%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6%E8%BF%BD%E5%8A%A0%E3%81%AE%E3%82%B3%E3%83%A1%E3%83%B3%E3%83%88%E3%82%92%E8%A1%A8%E7%A4%BA%E3%81%99%E3%82%8B%E6%96%B9%E6%B3%95%E3%81%AE%E5%B0%8E%E5%85%A5%E3%81%AE%E6%8F%90%E6%A1%88 * On Wed Nov 12 01:05:26 UTC 2014 I asked this list if the technical team could help the patrollers of recent changes to Wikipedia's medical articles “...tag the log entry of revisions ... as having been reviewed for policy/guideline compliance by a trusted editor.” [1] I am quite technically illiterate and may have misunderstood, but judging by Yusuke Matsubara's description, the extension he mentions above seems like it might fit our needs. Will it enable patrollers to add a comment to the edit summary? Does anyone know if it works on en.Wikipedia? 1. https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2014-November/079418.html ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Revision metadata as a service?
Thanks Bartosz. Just to clarify: If we apply FlaggedRevs to all medical articles (articles that have the WP:MED template on their talk page), configured to display the latest article version, can we create a permission (say, Medicine Reviewer) that allows one to tag the revision log entry with a comment? Would it interfere in any way with the normal practice of other editors who don't have that permission? Anthony Cole http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Anthonyhcole On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 3:05 AM, Bartosz Dziewoński matma@gmail.com wrote: W dniu środa, 12 listopada 2014 Anthony Cole ahcole...@gmail.com napisał(a): Allow us to tag the log entry of normal revisions (not pending changes/flagged revisions - no medical articles presently have flagged revisions, and none are likely to in the near future) as having been reviewed for policy/guideline compliance by a trusted editor. This is one of the things the FlaggedRevs extension (the same one that powers the pending changes system on the English Wikipedia) allows you to do. It can be configured to provide arbitrary flags (not just binary okay/not okay), and it can be configured to display the latest version of the article (rather than the flagged one) to visitors by default, and it can be configred to work on all articles on a wiki. -- -- Matma Rex ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Revision metadata as a service?
As someone who patrols recent changes to our 33,000 (and rising) health sciences-related articles with a diminishing number of colleagues, one thing developers could do to help us keep that content safe would be this: Allow us to tag the log entry of normal revisions (not pending changes/flagged revisions - no medical articles presently have flagged revisions, and none are likely to in the near future) as having been reviewed for policy/guideline compliance by a trusted editor. There are maybe a dozen regular/semi-regular med patrollers (down from about twice that number three years ago), and I'm very conscious that we aren't keeping up. If I see a revision has been reviewed by one of that dozen whom I trust, I'll (not always, but often) skip checking that revision and move on to the next unreviewed revision. This will a) save me and the others a lot of time, allowing us to cover much more ground and b) give us a handle on how thoroughly we're vetting changes to this sensitive content. Ideally, each of us that reviews a revision should be able to tag its log entry - so we can see the depth of review each revision has undergone. The board of Wiki Project Med Foundation are discussing this at the moment, and we see it as a very effective step toward safeguarding and improving our medical offering. If you could do this for us, it would be very much appreciated. Anthony Cole http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Anthonyhcole On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 11:25 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, a failed piece of rotting [configuration] code on en.wiki is called Pending changes; this doesn't mean that the extension, used by over 200 wikis, has been affected in any way. Nemo ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
