In Wikisource, the option to validate comes up during editing a proofread page. But now, the option is coming up for not-proofread pages, even during creation of new pages in the Page: namespace. The problem is occurring in all Wikisource projects.
Description
Description
Details
Details
| Subject | Repo | Branch | Lines +/- | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Removes pagequality-admin right from sysop user group | mediawiki/extensions/ProofreadPage | master | +1 -3 |
Related Objects
Related Objects
- Mentioned In
- T241824: Create "proofread-admin" user group in plwikisource
- Mentioned Here
- T51482: Create auto-validate privilege
Event Timeline
Comment Actions
@Hrishikes we have added a new user right called "pagequality-admin" that is, by default, enabled only to admins and allow them to tag as validated all pages. It is useful when you want to re-create already validated pages. See task T51482 . I'm going to send an email to the mailing list about that.
Feel free to create an other task if you prefer to see this right only given to an other group of users
Comment Actions
@Tpt , I think, this can be done only in smaller wikisources where there is 1-2 active members, not in all wikisource projects without consensus from the respective communities.
Comment Actions
I agree with @Bodhisattwa that this should not be the default ; communities should turn this on by consensus. I think that the addition of the right is a very useful feature, I think applying it without consultation as the default inadvisable.
Comment Actions
@Billinghurst This is currently enabled only for admin group. Do you think they could abuse this right?
Comment Actions
I am slightly concerned about the whole scenario.
It is not a trust issue, it is a proofreading issue.
Validated means that two sets of eyes have independentlty been over the process, and now we are saying that if you are an admin that one set of eyes is sufficient. We are changing the basis of what we say is the process. AND we are saying that without an open discussion. We are saying that advancing to a validated state is a quality step of a work without the effort to do it.
It is not about abuse, it is about what the community expects, and what we say we are doing, and it is about openness, and need, and accidental use and ...
- We do not need to have it on permanently; can you demonstrate how and why we need to have it on?
- having it as an assignable right, even self-administerable, is preferable to default on
- if it is easy to have the community review and turn on, then let that happen, rather than make the communities turn it off
- it is too hard to review and monitor its potential for abuse
- even admins make innocent mistakes around I and 1; 0 and O
- proofreading is about proofreading, not trust
Comment Actions
@Zdzislaw I absolutely agree with @Billinghurst here. When admins do the ordinary proofread job, they should not be required to be extra carefull. While this right is on, they are even not warned if they accidentally do something wrong. While this right may be usefull in some rare cases, for most of the admins' work it will be a disadvantage that require extra carefulness. I suggest:
- create a new user group with this right for all Wikisources that use ProofreadPage
- allow admins to asign/revoke this right to themself (or maybe even to any user if they wish)
There should be possibility to disable this feature for an admin if he/she wishes so. I wish so for myself.
Comment Actions
Change 358084 had a related patch set uploaded (by Tpt; owner: Tpt):
[mediawiki/extensions/ProofreadPage@master] Removes pagequality-admin right from sysop user group
Comment Actions
@Ankry workflow looks great even if it has the disadvantage to add an other user group. Thank you for the idea! We could definitely implement that on some/all Wikisource. I have just proposed a change that removes the right from the sysop (admin) group from the default configuration. It could be a good idea to move back to the previous state before having discussion on which process should be used.
Comment Actions
...and that was the reason I wrote my slightly provocative post
It is not a trust issue, it is a proofreading issue.
absolutely!
Validated means that two sets of eyes have independentlty been over the process, and now we are saying that if you are an admin that one set of eyes is sufficient. We are changing the basis of what we say is the process. AND we are saying that without an open discussion. We are saying that advancing to a validated state is a quality step of a work without the effort to do it.
absolutely not! Proofreaded means that two sets of eyes have independently been over the process (this is rule on pl ws)... The proofread status should be set by another user than rewriting the text (not proofread). Validated means that three sets of eyes... So why do we let the user set the "Proofread" status immediately?
Z.
Comment Actions
In greek Wikisource (elwikisource), a small wiki where admins are very active in the ordinary proofread job, we are also worried about this feature (discussion). Although probably this is not the appropriate place to discuss Wikisource policies, my opinion is that this right should be disabled by default and not be granted to local users, but to a group of higher level users (Global admins?).
Comment Actions
A discussion on this issue is taking place in Bengali Wikisource. There it is proposed to revoke the rights from admins, create separate user group rights for this specific purpose, which can not be granted by local admins. If such special right is to be granted, it should not be granted for indefinite period.
This comment was removed by Hrishikes.
Comment Actions
Change 358084 merged by jenkins-bot:
[mediawiki/extensions/ProofreadPage@master] Removes pagequality-admin right from sysop user group
Comment Actions
I have just merged a change that removes the new "pagequality-admin" rights from the sysop group because this change that I thought not problematic seems to be. It should be deployed next week on Wikisource.
Now, let's fine a good way to still enable people that needs to override the page quality attribute to do so if they really need to. I like the idea of having a special user group (yet another one...) which membership could be edited by admins. If we could reach a global consensus on that, this solution could be deployed on all Wikisources fairly easily.
Comment Actions
The emerging concept in English Wikisource discussion is that this right may be self-assignable by the admins, not in bot mode, for a specific period and purpose, list of purposes to be fixed by the community. This right is not to be general default for the admins, purpose for self-assigning the right, like a bot-flag, to be mandatorily chosen, from a pre-fixed menu, as decided by community consensus.
Comment Actions
In plainer words, the concept is this: there will be a new user group, say Page-quality admins. Admins will be able to assign themselves to this group. Admins in bot mode (i.e., having membership of the bot-user group) and bot accounts with admin rights will not have access to this group. There will be a time menu and a reason menu while assigning this right. Both menus will be mandatory. A bureaucrat can add/change options in the two menus after community consensus. If the site has no 'crat, a steward can do it. Some sites may want this right as a regular feature. They may choose the option "indefinite" from the time menu. Sites not wanting this as a regular feature won't have the indefinite option, these being fixable by the 'crat or steward. This way, those who want it, those who don't, and those who want it in a restrictive way --- all will be satisfied. (sites that don't want it at all may lock the time menu by greying it).