Wikimedia Bugzilla is closed!

Brion,

What is the policy for consensus for enabling this feature?  All the other requests have had overwhelming support for it, this one is borderline.  Please advise.

~RobH

(In reply to comment #1)
> Brion,
> 
> What is the policy for consensus for enabling this feature?  All the other
> requests have had overwhelming support for it, this one is borderline.  Please
> advise.
> 
> ~RobH
> 

Trying to help to understand this:

Now the page at Portuguese Wikisource is 14 days old and no one objected since I've made the announcement of this bug request (http://pt.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Wikisource%3AEsplanada%2FFlaggedRevs&diff=111286&oldid=111104&uselang=en).

The only one that edited that page since it (http://pt.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Wikisource:Esplanada/FlaggedRevs&diff=next&oldid=111287&uselang=en) has said "E sou favorável, mas preciso entender primeiro como vai ficar, porque testei no labs e não entendi muito bem" (+- "I support, but first I need to understand it, since I've tested it on en.labs.wikimedia.org but don't know how it works"). 

I've replyed back (http://pt.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Wikisource:Esplanada/FlaggedRevs&diff=next&oldid=111288&uselang=en) "Como você é elegível a ''editor'', poderá tirar as suas dúvidas com a ferramenta "em mãos" e, conforme for, propor alterações nas configurações." (+- "As you is eligible to be an "editor", you can test it [when it gets enabled] and make proposals for changes on the config if needed"). Since that reply made by me on 19 November, no one have replied on that page.

Rob, looks good currently -- several yes votes on http://pt.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Esplanada/FlaggedRevs so we have a paper trail. :) Go right ahead...

I've made a mistake on my original request. I found it only today, when playing with FlaggedRevs on a personal wiki.

(In reply to comment #0)

> * $wgFlaggedRevValues = 6 , $wgFlaggedRevPristine = 6, $wgFlagRestrictions =
> array( 'accuracy' => array( 'review' => 6 ), 'depth' => array( 'review' => 0 ),
> 'style' => array( 'review' => 0 ), );)

My intention with it was to allow only one flag with 6 levels (the default config is 3 flags with 3 levels each), based on http://pt.wikisource.org/wiki/Predefini%C3%A7%C3%A3o:Prospecto-EP :

* 0% = rejected
* 25%
* 50%
* 75%
* 100% = the maximum value that Editors can set
* Edição Wikisource = pristine edition, only Reviewers can set this level

This request has been fulfilled to specifications above.  If there is an issue with anything, please do feel free to reopen this ticket, or open a new one.  If you open a new one, please reference this ticket if possible.

Thanks!

Thankyou so much for enabling it! I've found two bugs:

1) Reviewer is able to set pages as level 0 ("0%"), level 1 ("25%"), level 2 ("50%"), level 3 ("75%"), level 4 ("100%"), level 5 ("Edição Wikisource") and level 6 (unused at Portuguese Wikisource). Please remove the level 6 and change the $wgFlaggedRevPristine too

2) The review box is displayed to Editors, but the drop-down menu is displayed as disabled (in practice the user isn't allowed to review pages). Please fix it and make able to Editors flag the pages up to level 4 ("100%")

I do belive this is now corrected, but I am not entirely certain.  Please review and let me know.

Per new consensus (3 support comments, none oppose in one week) at http://pt.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Esplanada/FlaggedRevs#Nova_proposta , please change the pt.wikisource config for FlaggedRevs to the following:

    $wgFlaggedRevsLowProfile = false;
        $wgFlaggedRevsNamespaces = array(NS_MAIN, NS_IMAGE, NS_TEMPLATE, 102, 104, 106, 108, 110);
        $wgFlaggedRevTabs = true;
        $wgFlaggedRevValues = 1;
        );

Reason: After some weeks of testing the current config, we have decided that the work-in-progress status should be specified only on the "Anexo:Ficha/<name-of-the-work>" pages. The FlaggedRevs feature should work like in the de.wikipedia (to stabilize pages).

Best regards,
[[:m:User:555]]

The current config is:

        $wgFlaggedRevsLowProfile = false;
        $wgFlaggedRevsNamespaces = array(NS_MAIN, NS_IMAGE, NS_TEMPLATE, 102, 104, 106, 108, 110);
        $wgFlaggedRevValues = 5;
        $wgFlaggedRevPristine = 5; 
        $wgFlagRestrictions = array(
        'accuracy' => array( 'review' => 5 ),
        'accuracy' => array( 'editor' => 5 ),
        );

and you all want it changed to:

    $wgFlaggedRevsLowProfile = false;
        $wgFlaggedRevsNamespaces = array(NS_MAIN, NS_IMAGE, NS_TEMPLATE, 102, 104, 106, 108, 110);
        $wgFlaggedRevTabs = true;
        $wgFlaggedRevValues = 1;
        );

Is that correct?  The consensus is to remove the FlagRestrictions that are currently in place, including the RevValues and RevPristine?

I hate to make you reply back and apologize for the delay, but I want to ensure we do not do the incorrect thing.  Let me know via this bug and I will take care of it!

Whell, no geeks are present on this discussion, so no one is able to talk about the RevPristine thing (neither I are a geek, I only do some tests on my box). The RevPristine value is in my opinion removable; the changes you have done on comment 7 dind't fixed the "2)" from comment 6 and I believe that it is because to the RevPristine line (some wikis don't have that value defined according to http://noc.wikimedia.org/conf/highlight.php?file=flaggedrevs.php ).

The RevValues string is present on the request, so I think that you are refering to the FlagRestrictions. I have forgotten to mention that on my propose :/ I think that you can remove this line without problems, making the pt.wikisource to work with the default values from the software/Wikimedia settings. If it generates any kind of problem or if someone huffs on the Village pump topic I simply will annoy on this bug again :)

I have made the requested changes.  If there are any issues, just either re-open this bug or enter a new one (make sure to reference this one if you create a new one!)

I'm reopening the bug to request a little modification that doesn't need local consensus: when a reviewer reviews any edit, the validation summary is the following: "((automático) [Estado dos progressos: 25%])" or "([Estado dos progressos: 25%])". But usually the correct progress status isn't 25% and in every review that situation occurs.

I'd like you to change the "25%" to "Aprovada", like: "((automático) [Estado dos progressos: Aprovada])" and "([Estado dos progressos: Aprovada])"; because the reviewers' function is only to validate pages as acceptable (not percentages). 

(In reply to comment #12)
> I'm reopening the bug to request a little modification that doesn't need local
> consensus: when a reviewer reviews any edit, the validation summary is the
> following: "((automático) [Estado dos progressos: 25%])" or "([Estado dos
> progressos: 25%])". But usually the correct progress status isn't 25% and in
> every review that situation occurs.
> 
> I'd like you to change the "25%" to "Aprovada", like: "((automático) [Estado
> dos progressos: Aprovada])" and "([Estado dos progressos: Aprovada])"; because
> the reviewers' function is only to validate pages as acceptable (not
> percentages). 
> 

Now, I think it's better change the "((automático) [Estado dos progressos: 25%])" or "([Estado dos progressos: 25%])" to the same of Wikinews in portuguese: "((automático) [Precisão: Objetiva])" or "([Precisão: Objetiva])".

Done locally. Alright now.