Wiki-like-editing is useless at this moment

[Batnik 80]

There is one setting now:
Moderate new records

But one VERY Important setting is missing:
Moderate records changes

Without this setting the whole system is useless as the user can post cool new posts and after they get approved they are posting porn stuff in it ... and i dont even get informed about post changes AT ALL!!! do i always have to get there and see if there is changed content ... every hour, every minute?

So why dont moderate post changes?

Here is a possible solution:

1. after the user changes the post
   1. inform moderator
   2. save a copy of this post: "set this post for moderation"
   3. from now on this user sees only this "edit-copy" of this post, all other users see the original post
   4. let the user edit this copy so many times he wants to
   5. after every submit, the post is sent for submiting (if revisions are enabled only this revision)
   6. no need to hide or delete the original post unit changes are confirmed as its different postID
   7. if revisions are enabled => use it insead of postID or always use revisions when wiki-editing is enabled
2. after the moderator confirmed the changes
   1. ovverride the orginal post with the new version
   2. delete the copy or save a revision
   3. inform user => post approved

This system right now makes absolutely no sense without changes-moderation. So please make some changes or disable it completly.

What you think?

[+opentype 4,613]

I agree to the feature request. 

However, I would suggest that you stick to calm factual descriptions for such requests. IPS will judge the feature request by itself. It doesn’t need red, exclamation marks or exaggerations (i.e. “it’s useless”). 

If it helps you as a work-around: On my 3.4 site I monitor Wiki article changes by having set up blocks which are ordered by last change. It’s much easier to spot changes this way. 

[chilihead 1,729]

Really need this. With an expansive database this could fill up with not only malicious info but erroneous info you do not approve of. We have editors for such approvals that will research the changes, this is really needed for a clean and professional database or records.

Edited November 27, 2015 by chilihead

[esquire 311]

10 hours ago, opentype said:

I agree to the feature request. 

However, I would suggest that you stick to calm factual descriptions for such requests. IPS will judge the feature request by itself. It doesn’t need red, exclamation marks or exaggerations (i.e. “it’s useless”). 

If it helps you as a work-around: On my 3.4 site I monitor Wiki article changes by having set up blocks which are ordered by last change. It’s much easier to spot changes this way. 

I agree with the OP even though you do have a point. Perhaps "urgent fix needed" may be technically the most accurate. While I can appreciate your workaround I can say that on active or visible sites the notion of editing away mass spam is an utter nightmare. You'll spend significant time needlessly deleting automated entries or those created by human drones. It's why I haven't implemented certain features as of yet.

[+sobrenome 349]

Please, upgrade wiki database like described!

[+sudo 238]

Bump on this permission again. Would really make things a bit easier and safer.

[Batnik 80]

after several months there is still no solution from invision ...

[+sobrenome 349]

Please, correct this moderation fault.

[+-FP 626]

Yeah I guess this is kinda needed.

Edited February 1, 2016 by -FP

[+Apfelstrudel 154]

I agree. We need this modification of the wiki permission system.

[+Time Travel Institute 15]

3 years and no solution?

[+QWio 5]

This is an absolute must. +1

[+TheWorldNewsMedia.org 80]

This is not good news..... as someone who was about to start using the wiki more.....

Maybe I should hold off ?

[+Dll 167]

Since this thread was started in 2015, you may be waiting a while....

Edited February 24 by Dll