Wikipedia talk:Moderator Tools/Automoderator: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Nosebagbear (talk | contribs) ADding questions to talk page |
Nosebagbear (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
==How would English Wikipedia evaluate Automoderator to decide whether to use it?== |
==How would English Wikipedia evaluate Automoderator to decide whether to use it?== |
||
*To me at least, the really relevant portion is "what edits could Automoderator catch that ClueNG '''isn't already'''". So any evaluation would be easied by seeing examples/scale of what it's catching. Attached to that is being confident that automoderator isn't making more false positives than ClueNG (we could already configure ClueNG to catch way more problematic edits if we accepted twice the false positive rate, so 0.1% or less would be needed). [[User:Nosebagbear|Nosebagbear]] ([[User talk:Nosebagbear|talk]]) 11:16, 25 August 2023 (UTC) |
|||
==Would the community rather test this software early (e.g. in log-only modes), or wait until further in development after other communities have trialled it?== |
==Would the community rather test this software early (e.g. in log-only modes), or wait until further in development after other communities have trialled it?== |
||
Revision as of 11:16, 25 August 2023
Do you think ClueBot NG has a substantial impact on the volume of edits you need to review?
Do you review ClueBot NG's edits or false positive reports? If so, how do you find this process?
Are there any feature requests you have for ClueBot NG?
How would English Wikipedia evaluate Automoderator to decide whether to use it?
- To me at least, the really relevant portion is "what edits could Automoderator catch that ClueNG isn't already". So any evaluation would be easied by seeing examples/scale of what it's catching. Attached to that is being confident that automoderator isn't making more false positives than ClueNG (we could already configure ClueNG to catch way more problematic edits if we accepted twice the false positive rate, so 0.1% or less would be needed). Nosebagbear (talk) 11:16, 25 August 2023 (UTC)