Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Delayed revisions: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Timing: new section
Line 5: Line 5:


Instinctively I'd actually go with a number more like 15 minutes, since most reverts appear to be quite quick. But this is probably something that could benefit from actual data about revert timing. [[User:Dragons flight|Dragons flight]] ([[User talk:Dragons flight|talk]]) 20:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Instinctively I'd actually go with a number more like 15 minutes, since most reverts appear to be quite quick. But this is probably something that could benefit from actual data about revert timing. [[User:Dragons flight|Dragons flight]] ([[User talk:Dragons flight|talk]]) 20:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

:I guess it kind of depends. I just wanted to avoid anybody suggesting something more like 18 hours. I've seen vandalism on little watched pages hang for hours before getting reverted. — [[User:Blue-Haired Lawyer|Blue-Haired Lawyer]] 21:06, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:06, 29 January 2009

Previous discussion: Wikipedia talk:Flagged revisions#An alternative to flagged revisions: delayed editing reconsidered
Wikipedia is not a democracy by indicating support or opposition here we can get a better idea whether the proposal has the support of the community in general

Timing

Instinctively I'd actually go with a number more like 15 minutes, since most reverts appear to be quite quick. But this is probably something that could benefit from actual data about revert timing. Dragons flight (talk) 20:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it kind of depends. I just wanted to avoid anybody suggesting something more like 18 hours. I've seen vandalism on little watched pages hang for hours before getting reverted. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 21:06, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]