-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I do want to thank everyone who gave input for my BLP question, and a
special nod to Angela who pointed out the archives. I should have
read those first.
Here is a second issue I would like to discuss, if the group is inclined.
Speedy deletion nomi
The problem with your suggestion is almost a software issue as well.
Why they are done right now... In 60 seconds or less is because that
is what users see on the ervent changes feed.
Secondly there is the issue of google indexing our new pages very
quickly. I have heard estimates that new article
Create an automatic {{uc}} which expires in two hours. New editors won't
know about the uc.
Will Johnson
**One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail,
Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now.
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom0
Sorry, I am not getting it. Please explain in more detail.
On 12/30/08, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
> Create an automatic {{uc}} which expires in two hours. New editors won't
> know about the uc.
>
> Will Johnson
>
>
> **One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail,
> Gmail,
In a message dated 12/30/2008 8:32:58 PM Pacific Standard Time,
wilh...@nixeagle.org writes:
Sorry, I am not getting it. Please explain in more detail.>>
First you must be familiar with the {{uc}}.
This tag tells a tagger/deleter... STOP I'm working here !
If, for e
Right but nobody will know to check back on the article. Generally
articles are monitored by watching the rc feeds, at least that is what
I used to do.
On 12/31/08, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
>
> In a message dated 12/30/2008 8:32:58 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> wilh...@nixeagle.org writes:
>
> Sorry
In a message dated 12/30/2008 9:35:23 PM Pacific Standard Time,
wilh...@nixeagle.org writes:
Right but nobody will know to check back on the article. Generally
articles are monitored by watching the rc feeds, at least that is what
I used to do.>>
--
I won't argue against that but I know that others won't take your position.
As an aside, regarding the fact backlog I do plan on writing a tool
tommorrow or Thursday (whenever toolserver comes back up and I fix a
few other tools) that will list all articles by category that are both
ib the blp cat
Except to get a lot of flack on a tool to "fix" BLPs with fact tags.
I anticipate a poor reception :)
Personally I think bots are the worst thing to ever happen to the project.
I can't think of one I like. Well maybe one.
Will Johnson
**One site keeps you connected to all yo
The tool won't fix them, people will. The tool is only intended to
help direct people to categories they have knowledge about.
Example:
A list of all living american football players with a fact tag on them.
A list of all living country singers with fact tags on them.
Given these lists football
Thank you for explaining that.
I would endorse a tool like the one you described.
Will Johnson
**One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail,
Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now.
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom0025)
__
Glad to, I'm not crazy yet, I know the limits of programs :).
--
User:Nixeagle
On 12/31/08, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
> Thank you for explaining that.
> I would endorse a tool like the one you described.
>
> Will Johnson
>
>
>
> **One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Ma
ot;We are the
leading widget provider..." type garbage.
-Original Message-
From: Jon
Subj: [WikiEN-l] Speedy deletion
Date: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:07 pm
Size: 1K
To: English Wikipedia
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I do want to thank everyone who gave input for my B
On 12/30/08, Wilhelm Schnotz wrote:
> Secondly there is the issue of google indexing our new pages very
> quickly. I have heard estimates that new articles are out on google
> anywhere from 1 hour to 5 hours. We do need to make sure attacks and
> spam are removed before google indexs them.
If thi
Sorry I meant to finish that thought.
> Perhaps some of this energy can be channeled toward other tasks.
Might sic them loose on copyright backlogs or something else where the
benefit of the doubt is not the benefit of the project.
—C.W.
___
WikiEN-l m
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 5:07 PM, Charlotte Webb
wrote:
> On 12/30/08, Wilhelm Schnotz wrote:
>> Secondly there is the issue of google indexing our new pages very
>> quickly. I have heard estimates that new articles are out on google
>> anywhere from 1 hour to 5 hours. We do need to make sure atta
There should also be an automatically expiring {{NOINDEX}} as well;
that would fix the google problem.
On 31/12/2008, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
> First you must be familiar with the {{uc}}.
> This tag tells a tagger/deleter... STOP I'm working here !
>
> If, for each new article, we simply automat
2008/12/31 Charlotte Webb :
> If this is truly the root of all urgency we should turn on flaggedrevs.
Try and keep up with marking new pages as patrolled for say half an hour.
> In the beginning we would want Google to index only an article's last
> stable version (if one exists).
>
> After a cer
We could as easily set up new pages to have a half-hour holding
period; the problem is how to separate the need to remove the truly
nasty material immediately. A delay period inevitably requires
checking things twice.
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 3:15 PM, geni wrote:
> 2008/12/31 Charlotte Webb :
>> If
2009/1/1 David Goodman :
> We could as easily set up new pages to have a half-hour holding
> period; the problem is how to separate the need to remove the truly
> nasty material immediately. A delay period inevitably requires
> checking things twice.
>
Already possible
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/in
When I patrol, I go from the link to "patrolling pages from the back
of the unpatrolled backlog."
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:NewPages&dir=prev&hidepatrolled=1
The problem is not setting it up so I person can do it; the problem is
arranging so pages are routinely
patrolled af
21 matches
Mail list logo
