What is the problem you're trying to solve?Edit
Sometimes users will make multiple edits in a short time frame to inhibit article reversion, or to fix a typographical error. That causes extra workload in either case.
What is your solution?Edit
The solution is to condense revision histories. If a user makes two edits within the same hour, the edits should then be merged. If a different user makes an edit in between the two edits of the other user, then the edits should not be merged.
The goal of this project is to make revision histories shorter and easier to read.
- There may be unforeseen difficulties with this, but it would sure be nice for watchlist RSS feeds... Junkyardsparkle (talk) 07:23, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
- Would be a really good benefit. Those kind of histories are really hard to read: https://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pong&action=history ; Moreover, vandalism made on several edits are harder to cancel than merged one. Ssx`z (talk) 08:20, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
- less edits, less history, less space...great idea :) Triton (talk) 10:48, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
- It Might create complications for example when a user has left 2 or more separate summaries for different controversial edits. Crouch, Swale (talk) 22:07, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
- Good idea Andthu (talk) 22:07, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
- Only merge sequential edits that lack an edit summary; never mark merged edit as minor. Swpb (talk) 22:24, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Expand your ideaEdit
Would a grant from the Wikimedia Foundation help make your idea happen? You can expand this idea into a grant proposal.