Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by flomo 5655 days ago
I'm suggesting a much simpler concept. Article changes shouldn't "go live" until there is consensus that they've passed basic proofreading and quality checks. This would give editors time to review changes in batch rather than feeling like they must monitor everyone else's edits in real time.

(It's interesting to think about, but Wikipedia could never conceptualize distributed branching when they are currently doing the equivalent of developing right on the production server.)

This idea has been discussed many times over the years, but never adopted for whatever reason. My suspicion is the active Wikipedians have this system of scoring Wikipoints for quickly reverting vandalism and bad edits, and don't want a system which encourages actual editing.