There is an ongoing discussion about T121995 and its affects on the main Hungarian village pump. Although the opinions are mixed about its positive/negative impact, that is clear it should be reverted. The test period has already ended more than a month, so please revert it as soon as it is possible. Forgetting changing it back caused many unnecessary arguments because the deal was a trial period, so it should have happened. Pinging @Dereckson and @Tgr.
|operations/mediawiki-config||master||+0 -1||[huwiki] Set wgFlaggedRevsOverride back to true per community vote|
|Resolved||Bencemac||T210224 Revert FlaggedRevs changes on the Hungarian Wikipedia|
|Resolved||Tgr||T209224 Analyze effect of huwiki FlaggedRevs configuration change on problematic edits and new user retention|
|Open||None||T223900 Create ORES dataset for huwiki edits in the last two years or so|
|Resolved||• ACraze||T228078 Retrain damaging/goodfaith models for huwiki|
|Resolved||Halfak||T223882 Re-label huwiki damaging and badfaith edits|
|Open||None||T223899 Information about finished campaigns should be accessible in Wikilabels|
- Mentioned In
- T325925: Analyze effect of huwiki FlaggedRevs configuration change on problematic edits and new user retention (round2)
- Mentioned Here
- T209224: Analyze effect of huwiki FlaggedRevs configuration change on problematic edits and new user retention
T121995: Switch FlaggedRevs on Hungarian Wikipedia to a "flagged protection" mode
@Aklapper I do not agree. We discussed that we cannot answer the test's main question (like 'do we loose anons and new [non-trusted] editors because their changes do not appear immediately?') because we did not collect data for this (or for anything else, not at all). As a speaker, I am only repeating myself.
MediaWiki has a public log of all edits and registrations; I'm not sure what other data we would want to collect. It's just that someone needs to actually analyse it.
I don't think the sense of urgency some users are trying to instill on the village pump is in any way justified, but if someone really insists on doing another config change for the duration of the analysis, I guess there is no harm in it either.
@Dereckson, Please write in the ticket if there is some reason why the configuration can't be changed back as the huwiki community asked. The current situation is that everything just stalls, because nobody actually implementing decisions is bad.
"Although the opinions are mixed about its positive/negative impact, that is clear it should be reverted."
I've some difficulties with this concept. How can a thing could be clear if the opinions are described as mixed?
Actually we voted to test it for a limited time period, then evaluate and make a final decision. The problem is no one seems to be interested in working on the evaluation so that process is stuck. (I intend to, eventually, but have some side projects which are more urgent right now. I don't think a few more weeks of delay makes much difference, and TBH I feel that the people who are complaining are exactly the ones who don't care much about the evaluation and have made up their minds on what they want from the start. Then again, I don't think switching the config back now (and then evaluating and making the final decision) makes much difference, either.)
My suggestion is that because it is almost April the testing period would be a full year (365 days) if it is not a problem for huwiki community and then revert the change. This would make the results of the test more useful to others. This, of course, requires support from huwiki community.
We voted for six months, not a year. IMHO, no one would like and support this idea because the community is not satisfied with the current situation/status. Personally, I am tired of hearing that 'why are you doing nothing?' and 'we are waiting for this since X', just because I am not able to do it myself.