Slashdot Mirror
Edit-Approval System Proposed For English-Language Wikipedia
An anonymous reader writes "A group of powerful Wikipedia insiders are pushing for FlaggedRevisions which will require a 'trusted user' to approve of edits before they go live on the online encyclopedia. There is also opposition but with support of founder Jimbo Wales it is likely to go through. The German version has tried the system, leading to three-week delays between edit and publication. The English wiki with its higher number of anonymous editors per trusted user is expected to suffer longer queues if FlaggedRevisions is implemented on all articles. This comes just a few days after Britannica announced that readers will be allowed to suggest edits and have them reviewed within 20 minutes. Will we see the day when Britannica can be edited almost instantly while editing Wikipedia requires fighting bureaucracy, patience and the right contacts?" Note that, according to the quote from Jimmy Wales in the linked article, this system would only be used "on a subset of articles, the boundaries of which can be adjusted over time to manage the backlog."
... am waiting for a Chrome checkbox in the toolbar that automatically removes all the wikipedia entries from a google search.
... while editing Wikipedia requires fighting bureaucracy, patience and the right contacts?
Ehr, that's pretty much what it is now.
In the beginning I had to much trust in wiki content, this was corrected after reading some reviews and case studies. Today I simply ignore the whole site because I'm not interested in wasting my time to dig out the references.
In the end, when you need the data, you just end up checking Britannica.
"Violence is the last refuge of the competent, and, generally, the first refuge of the incompetent" - Thing_1
Britannica has promised sub 20minute delays. They have nothing to show they can do this. Wikipedia is on the other end of things. Summary writer is a knob.
i dont want it. if i wanted another britannica, or larousse, i wouldnt use wikipedia.
a group of dimwitted morons can propose it. but if anyone actually puts in motion, they can shove wikipedia in their butt - im sure an alternative will come up.
Read radical news here
How about a Slashdot system that stops the one guy with 20 accounts from making 4 opening comments on each article then modding them all to "5", that happens with EVERY SINGLE ARTICLE here on /.
Sorry, but Jimmy must have been in a delusion, when coming up with the concept of "Anyone can edit it. It will work! Trust me! The elite will work most on it! And vandalism does not happen because normally, people are good." ;)
Who do you think are those bureaucrats that control Wikipedia?
Hint: They earn no money from it, but have all the time of the day to work on Wikipedia.
The optimal person for this, is a jobless person, getting money from social security. Or someone else with too much time on their hands.
The elite is working on something important and earns money with this job. That's what makes them the elite.
Next, what is the reason someone would do this instead of something more fun? (Like playing games)
He has a personal interest in putting the "truth" out there. Which by definition is not the truth (except maybe from physics laws there is no such thing), but his truth.
Now it becomes very clear, why Wikipedia became, what it is today.
Wikipedia is dead. Long live Wikipedia.
By the way: If you have an open mind, a big web server, and some free programming time on your hands: I have a concept for something in my digital drawer, which would solve those problems. I tend to thing things to the end. :)
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.