User talk:Aaron Schulz/Archive/2008/September
This is an archive of past discussions with User:Aaron Schulz. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Sighted revisions question on RFAR
Hi VoA, would you mind answering the question I asked on this RFAR in regards to sighted revisions? Thanks! rootology (C)(T) 23:26, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for giving your input there, Aaron. Much appreciated, Anthøny ✉ 06:28, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
VoABot
Hello VoA. Could you please check this out? VoABot moved this request to the fulfilled section, although the request just had a note and not a definite admin decision. I'm not sure if VoABot should be moving down requests that are simply marked with {{RFPP|note}}. Please have a look into it. Thanks. Regards, Húsönd 15:34, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Sighted revisions
Hi, I've been working on a proposal for sighted revisions. It would be useful if administrators could enable sighted revisions for a page temporarily, setting an expiration time like for protection. Is it technically possible ? Cenarium Talk 10:53, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
- Function already exists. Aaron Schulz 11:25, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. I see that that it is not possible to write a reason when sighting on the test wiki. Will it be possible on Wikipedia ? I have the presentiment that this system will be used during disputes, and it may lead to "sighting wars". So it would be good to have the option to write a rationale. Cenarium Talk 12:47, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
- I also wonder if it's possible to restrict the ability to sight a certain page to a user subgroup of surveyors ? For example when an article is contentious or under dispute. This way, we could reduce the requirements for surveyor and enable sighted revisions for a larger class of articles. Thanks, Cenarium Talk 14:55, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
- Not currently, and not sure that would be a good idea. Aaron Schulz 08:28, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
- I see. Another possibility to control disputes and contentious articles would be the creation a user subgroup of surveyor, for example 'moderator', with a higher level of flagging, something like confirmed, and the possibility for admins to set an article to show the latest confirmed revision. Cenarium Talk 13:15, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
- Not currently, and not sure that would be a good idea. Aaron Schulz 08:28, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Blanking at RFPP
Hi, the instructions for requests for edits to protected pages were a little vague, so perhaps it was my formatting that caused the bot to blank this unfulfilled request?[1] DurovaCharge! 07:24, 27 September 2008 (UTC)