Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment February 2011/Archive 1: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
Line 463:
*This is where we desperately need some analysis of how it has performed, in the trial. In which circumstances was it beneficial, and which were not so good? Surely it isn't too hard to gather such information; I really did think that was the point of a trial. We should be able to compare articles with a similar prior history of vandalism which a) had PC b) had semi, and compare and contrast? And then we might be able to make informed comments regarding possible future implementations. We're shooting in the dark here. We had a trial, but we haven't analysed the results. If the trial didn't produce any meaningful results, then perhaps we can plan a new trial which will do so. If we remove it from all current, we'd have additional data to look at - seeing if the article problems are increased or reduced when they don't have PC.<small><span style="border:1px solid;background:#00008B">[[User:Chzz|'''<span style="background:#00008B;color:white"> Chzz </span>''']][[User talk:Chzz|<span style="color:#00008B;background-color:yellow;"> ► </span>]]</span></small> 03:25, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
*:Agreed. Someone neutral needs to crunch the numbers and come up with hard data. Until then, this section is sorely premature. —<font color="228B22">''[[User:Jéské Couriano|Jeremy]]''</font> <font color="00008B"><small><sup>([[User talk:Jéské Couriano|v^_^v]] [[Special:Contributions/Jéské Couriano|Hyper Combo K.O.!]])</sup></small></font> 22:08, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
*I think this needs to be left up to admins' discretion. Inevitably, if we start drawing up criteria for articles to be eligible for PC, not all that are eligible would benefit from it and there will be some (possibly many) that could benefit from it but are excluded by the criteria. [[User:HJ Mitchell|<
*'''Only''' when it meets the present requirements for semi-protection ''and'' is a high profile BLP article or one about a currently popular individual, and ''possibly'' in similar articles that are not BLPs but have BLP problems. There never was consensus for using it in non-BLPs--every admin who has done so has applied it without justification in policy & provided an argument why leaving to admin discretion is dangerous. '''[[User:DGG| DGG]]''' ([[User talk:DGG| talk ]]) 05:08, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
* PC1 on BLPs of high vandalism and on high edit warring pages, both where IPs ''and'' confirmed users are causing problems. This allows reviewers to take some pressure off admins, especially at low attendance troughs, by constructively stopping live edits while notifications/requests are made to PC2/Prot/ANI/3RR boards etc.
Line 480:
===What kinds of improvements or new features would we like to have added to pending changes?===
What can PC do for us that it doesn't already do? Are there ways to make the interface more user-friendly and to avoid long load times on PC protected pages? [[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 23:47, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
:I thought these had already been solved? We now have a reject button and it's a lot faster than when it started. [[User:HJ Mitchell|<
::It's a question, is there anything it doesn't do right now that you would like for it to do? The devs have stopped work on any improvements pending a consensus on its continued use, but are willing to make improvements should it be kept. [[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 18:58, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
:::Could someone in the know post a cute little table of the problems people reported and which ones have been fixed? [[User:Wnt|Wnt]] ([[User talk:Wnt|talk]]) 05:49, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
| |||