2009/8/20 Erik Zachte <erikzac...@infodisiac.com>: > There is another way to detect 100% reverts. It won't catch manual reverts > that are not 100 accurate but most vandal patrollers will use undo, and the > like. > > For every revision calculate md5 checksum of content. Then you can easily > look back say 100 revisions to see whether this checksum occurred earlier. > It is efficient and unambiguous.
A slightly less effective method would be to use the page size in bytes; this won't give the precise one-to-one matching, but as I believe it's already calculated in the data it might well be quicker. One other false positive here: edit warring where one or both sides is using undo/rollback. You'll get the impression of a lot of vandalism without there necessarily being any. -- - Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
