Help talk:User groups


FlaggedRevs autopromotion[edit]

mw:Extension:FlaggedRevs defines the following as the default settings for autopromotion. Feel free to discuss suggested changes. I realize this came up before but it got lost in a sea of more important issues. <source lang="php">

  1. Define when users get automatically promoted to Editors. Set as false to disable.
  2. Once users meet these requirements they will be promoted, unless previously demoted.

$wgFlaggedRevsAutopromote = array(

       'days'                  => 60, # days since registration
       'edits'                 => 250, # total edit count
       'excludeLastDays'       => 1, # exclude the last X days of edits from edit counts
       'benchmarks'            => 15, # number of "spread out" edits
       'spacing'               => 3, # number of days between these edits (the "spread")
       // Either totalContentEdits reqs OR totalCheckedEdits requirements needed
       'totalContentEdits'     => 300, # edits to pages in $wgContentNamespaces
       'totalCheckedEdits'     => 200, # edits before the stable version of pages
       'uniqueContentPages'    => 14, # unique pages in $wgContentNamespaces edited
       'editComments'          => 50, # number of manual edit summaries used
       'userpageBytes'         => 0, # size of userpage (use 0 to not require a userpage)
       'neverBlocked'          => true, # username was never blocked before?
       'maxRevertedEditRatio'  => .03, # max fraction of edits reverted via "rollback"/"undo"

); </source> --Quasar (talk) 03:59, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for that — yes, I realize that you and manc were occupied.  I've been persuaded that people don't find FlaggedRevs worth the overhead, so my suggested change would be to drop it entirely.    Ryan W (talk) 08:08, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Since fixing those initial problems there haven't been any further issues with it, so I'm disinclined to agree. It helps keep spam from being visible, and encourages establishment of a level of quality which I try to see through on a daily basis. I am a bit disappointed that we've not gone further in establishing "pristine" versions of more of our well-written and complete articles, but there's always time to do that in that nebulous "later". --Quasar (talk) 15:11, 3 February 2015 (UTC)