$wgFlaggedRevsOverride – Whether the stable version is the default content for pages.

Individual pages can be configured to have the stable or draft version as the default content by administrators. -- MediaWiki.org

Flagged Revisions range not been determined?

在T221933#5139996中，@1233thehongkonger写道：

https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:%E4%BA%92%E5%8A%A9%E5%AE%A2%E6%A0%88/%E6%96%B9%E9%92%88#%E9%87%8D%E6%8F%90%E7%B7%A8%E8%BC%AF%E5%AF%A9%E6%A0%B8/%E7%A9%A9%E5%AE%9A%E7%89%88%E6%9C%AC

I think range is determined, it is only used at highly vandalized pages, high volume pages, and also FA / GA etc.

This protection level is not that high.

In addition, it is pointed out that the amount of the edits of FA/GA could be too low to test whether the review system is efficient, which is the reason that highly vandalized pages and high volume pages are included.

P.S. Sorry for my mistakenly removing 94rain from subscribers list

Change 507932 had a related patch set uploaded (by 星耀晨曦; owner: 星耀晨曦):
[operations/mediawiki-config@master] Enable FlaggedRevisions on zhwiki

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/507932

Checking list:

1. Add zhwiki to flaggedrevs.dblist
2. Grant movestable, autoreview and review to sysop
3. Grant autoreview and review to rollbacker
4. Disable $wgKartographerEnableMapFrame on zhwiki

在T221933#5155350中，@RazeSoldier写道：

4. Disable $wgKartographerEnableMapFrame on zhwiki

Why disable $wgKartographerEnableMapFrame?

在T221933#5157829中，@Shizhao写道：

在T221933#5155350中，@RazeSoldier写道：

4. Disable $wgKartographerEnableMapFrame on zhwiki

Why disable $wgKartographerEnableMapFrame?

It seems like a rule, see the note here https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/operations/mediawiki-config/+/507932/2/wmf-config/InitialiseSettings.php

It is requested to keep the config change on hold.

Further discussion is needed on zhwiki before enabling the config change, as disabling MapFrame would affect approx. 20,000 pages, which is a significant issue.

@RazeSoldier It seems that it is not necessary to disable $wgKartographerEnableMapFrame if applying the English Wikipedia Model on Chinese Wikipedia. Right?

What is "the English Wikipedia Model"? enwiki set $wgFlaggedRevsOverride=false, so unnecessary disable $wgKartographerEnableMapFrame.

In T221933#5158028, @RazeSoldier wrote:

What is "the English Wikipedia Model"? enwiki set $wgFlaggedRevsOverride=false, so unnecessary disable $wgKartographerEnableMapFrame.

I guess Wong means the Model metioned as "Wikipedias which have Flagged Revs, but which show the latest version of a page by default ( $wgFlaggedRevsOverride = false)", just like what we can see in T191585.

In T221933#5158029, @KirkLU wrote:

In T221933#5158028, @RazeSoldier wrote:

What is "the English Wikipedia Model"? enwiki set $wgFlaggedRevsOverride=false, so unnecessary disable $wgKartographerEnableMapFrame.

I guess Wong means the Model metioned as "Wikipedias which have Flagged Revs, but which show the latest version of a page by default ( $wgFlaggedRevsOverride = false)", just like what we can see in T191585.

That is, in this case, English Wikipedia can have Flagged Revs while their mapFrame enabled at the same time. And Wong may wonders whether it is also possible for Chinese Wikipedia to have both the Flagged Revs and the mapFrame, just like enwiki do.

We can set $wgFlaggedRevsOverride=false, default true.

See T221933#5140456 and T221933#5140467.

In T221933#5158036, @RazeSoldier wrote:

We can set $wgFlaggedRevsOverride=false, default true.

See T221933#5140456 and T221933#5140467.

Thanks for your explanation. And I think, as is presented in discussions before in this site and in zhwiki, the Chinese Wikipedia want to apply the Rev system in some highly vandalized pages and high volume pages instead of reviewing all the pages. So setting $wgFlaggedRevsOverride=false is necessary and fits in the need and agreement in zhwiki.

So setting $wgFlaggedRevsOverride=false is necessary and fits in the need and agreement in zhwiki.

Have a community consensus?

In T221933#5158038, @RazeSoldier wrote:

So setting $wgFlaggedRevsOverride=false is necessary and fits in the need and agreement in zhwiki.

Have a community consensus?

Yes, of course, we can find the consensus in the final of the discussion. And permit me to quote some Chinese:

1. 权限组：权限暂时放在回退员之下（即回退员将会拥有修订巡查权）。管理员将直接持有此权 （无论结果如何）
2. 使用条目：

*1st 高风险的条目 (例如现时被半保护的条目，而原因为长期破坏)
*2nd 极高浏览量的条目 (此类条目一般被至少半保护)
*3rd 近期被破坏的条目 (很多例子了，不必多说)
The words before show that the community agree to add "review" to Rollbackers & Admins and apply the RevSystem in highly vandalized pages(1st), high volume pages(2nd) and the articles which are vandalized recently(3rd).

In T221933#5158038, @RazeSoldier wrote:

So setting $wgFlaggedRevsOverride=false is necessary and fits in the need and agreement in zhwiki.

Have a community consensus?

Although $wgFlaggedRevsOverride=false is not directly mentioned, the range of pages that the RevSystem should be applied is already determined. And it seems that $wgFlaggedRevsOverride=false is the only way to execute the plan.

In T221933#5158038, @RazeSoldier wrote:

So setting $wgFlaggedRevsOverride=false is necessary and fits in the need and agreement in zhwiki.

Have a community consensus?

The scope of flagged revision is determined to be applied on designated pages does not mean that the flagged revision does not apply to the pages by default. Understanding that it concerns you. There is also some details need to be discussed by the community. Please hold on and let the community determine the details.

In T221933#5158044, @Wong128hk wrote:

In T221933#5158038, @RazeSoldier wrote:

So setting $wgFlaggedRevsOverride=false is necessary and fits in the need and agreement in zhwiki.

Have a community consensus?

The scope of flagged revision is determined to be applied on designated pages does not mean the flagged revision does not apply to the pages by default. Understanding that it concerns you. There is also some details need to be discussed by the community. Please hold on and let the community to determine the details.

I'd agree with that. And we will try to bring the latest result here ASAP.

https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:%E4%BF%AE%E8%A8%82%E5%B7%A1%E6%9F%A5#%E8%A9%A6%E8%A1%8C%E6%9C%9F

From the above consensus, these are the following proposed settings:

$wgFlaggedRevsNamespaces : Mainspace, Wikipedia
$wgFlaggedRevsOverride : FALSE
$wgFlaggedRevsTags : 'status' => [ 'levels' => 1, 'quality' => 2, 'pristine' => 3 ]
$wgFlaggedRevsTagsRestrictions : 'status' => [ 'review' => 1, 'autoreview' => 1 ]
$wgFlaggedRevsRestrictionLevels : [ '', 'autoconfirmed' ]
$wgFlaggedRevsProtection : TRUE
$wgFlaggedRevsHandleIncludes : TRUE
$wgGroupPermissions['autoconfirmed']['autoreview'] : TRUE
stablesettings : sysop
User Group to be disabled : editor, autoreview, reviewer (of the extension)

I pushed a new patch.

When should we deploy the patch?

As close as possible to June 1.

I will schedule the patch on the 27th or 28th in next week.

Edited:
and -> or

In T221933#5203801, @RazeSoldier wrote:

I will schedule the patch on the 27th and 28th in next week.

Could you state exact time?

In T221933#5206834, @Hamishcn wrote:

Could you state exact time?

Considering the private arrangements, I think I have free time on the 29th. I will schedule to deploy the patch on that day, maybe at Mid-day SWAT (11:00-12:00 UTC).

Per https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Flagged_Revisions#Enabling, "get a test wiki for the language created on the beta cluster, test the translation and configuration there to ensure it's as intended" is required. I don't see a record of this happening? Testing in beta is required, because "FlaggedRevisions are very hard to configure". As such, you're probably not going to have the working configuration ready at your first try. We don't want experiments in production wikis, do we :).

(maybe a beta testing isn't required, provided flaggedrevs is running in zh_classicalwiki, but I would still want to hear a more experienced site-requester's opinion here)

But it seems that zh_classicalwiki uses the default configuration. Is there a reference value?

@Reedy Should I test my patch on beta-zhwiki? If so, this means that it cannot be deployed to zhwiki before June 1.

Also, is enabling FlaggedRevision extension within the scope of SWAT deploy? Enabling the extension seems complicated.

Is it necessary to reach certain conditions to enable the extension on zhwiki or to block the extension enabling at fundamentally? If it is the former, what conditions do we need to reach?

I need to make a summary to chinese wikipedia community for this situation.

In my understanding it is fundamentally. See also T163197 and T185664.

Also related to that is there some reason why moratoira cannot be removed as RFC by @Dereckson was closed without resolution and biggest voiced reason for it in first place was that nobody actually did enabling?

Is there any possibility for zhwiki to follow enwiki to set up an environment of a light weight form of Flagged Revisions a.k.a. Pending Changes?

In T221933#5216973, @Hamishcn wrote:

Is there any possibility for zhwiki to follow enwiki to set up an environment of a light weight form of Flagged Revisions a.k.a. Pending Changes?

Special:PendingChanges defined by FlaggedRevs extension.

Can we enable the extension on beta zhwiki?

@RazeSoldier: What's the sense in enabling something on beta which will not be enabled in production?

In T221933#5219611, @Aklapper wrote:

@RazeSoldier: What's the sense in enabling something on beta which will not be enabled in production?

I think it is possible to enable the extension in the future. (I didn't find a enough authoritative announcement to explain why it is forbidden to enable the extension on new wikis)

Before that, doing enough tests for the extension on the beta wiki can reduce the negative impact on production.

so may I know what is the progress?

If there is a need to conduct a technical trial, i.e. to test whether the extension will run smoothly on zhwiki, beta zhwiki is the place.

If we need to evaluate the interaction between the extension and the community, zhwiki is the place.

I think it should be clear enough. Please proceed.

(@Aklapper) if this is something which needs to be asked from WMF then from who or where it needs to be asked?

In T221933#5242375, @Wong128hk wrote:

so may I know what is the progress?

See previous comments about any "progress".

In T221933#5242399, @Zache wrote:

(@Aklapper) if this is something which needs to be asked from WMF then from who or where it needs to be asked?

I do not think there is anything/anyone to ask. See T221933#5216351 and T221933#5216671.

@Aklapper Ok one blocker removed

In T221933#5242769, @Zache wrote:

@Aklapper Ok one blocker removed

No, it wasn't. I've reverted your edit, sorry.

Change 507932 abandoned by Jforrester:
Enable FlaggedRevisions on zhwiki

Reason:
Per task.

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/507932

So.... This means the function is now being deployed?

In T221933#5528186, @gerritbot wrote:

Change 507932 abandoned by Jforrester:
Enable FlaggedRevisions on zhwiki

Reason:
Per task.

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/507932

@Hamishcn abandoned