Issue: Reputation for Wiki Contributions

This is an excellent idea to motivate members, maybe little W's for the reps?

Will this be in vaultwiki 4.0?

We are not going to be adding any more features to VaultWiki 3, so yes, this will be added in 4. I am not certain whether this will be added right away or in Beta 2 / 3, but one of the goals of VaultWiki 4 is making the wiki more rewarding for non-admin users.

Is it possible to sponsor this feature for rapid inclusion?

Donations page updated: http://www.vaultwiki.org/products/Donations

+1 need

For xenforo this should be a like function for each edit on the history page.

VW4 will have reputation functionality for specific wiki edits. However, I am not sure that this is the most effective approach because I doubt that enough people will review specific edits and rate those. It's much more likely that users would rate an article. Therefore it makes sense to me to have a wiki page quality rating scale that affects the contributors. Please see this suggestion: https://www.vaultwiki.org/issues/3508/
The benefit of this is that the page completeness can also be rated. The more complete and the higher the quality of a page, the larger the impact of page contributors should be. I have some ideas about this.
Basically it boils down to attributing a reputation value to the completeness of the page and then allocating it to the contributors.
Here is an example of the basic idea:

If the page is rated 'good complete article' attribute for example 50 reputation points.
If the page has 6 authors, divide the 50 points according to the % contributed.

The points are an example of the general gist.

Once the article evolves from Good to Great, the authors will have their points recalculated as there are more points to divide and possibly more authors to divide it between.

I really like the idea of awarding reputation for contributions based on ratings. This also gives reason for my idea in your ratings suggestion: that the various poll-types be varnamed, because doing this calculation based on customizable levels would require a dedicated class or at least a fully-fledged pre-fab.

Please rephrase. Its not clear to me if you agree with my suggestion not to have a reputation ratings with each edit, but to have a calculation based upon general article rating instead.

My reasoning for changing my opinion and wanting article ratings instead of edit ratings is that experience has shown that users will not take enough effort to go to the history tab and rate individual edits.

What do I need to do to get this function implemented in the very near future?

i.e. automatically award reputation points based upon the article completion state and article quality rating.

The absence of reputation points for wiki articles is seriously holding my members back from wiki participation. Its a major issue that I have been struggling for for years. Please please resolve this for the next release.

In my opinion, it would be good to have both, and above I am not-so-simply saying that it should be possible to use PHP code to override the rewards system if the admin wants to apply more complicated criteria to how the reputation points are dispersed.

Since this has https://www.vaultwiki.org/issues/3508/ as a dependency, it will not be appearing before polls or ratings themselves, except as a basic functionality, like the ability to Like old versions, or give reputation points for an old version.

As you may have noticed in Gamma 3, Poll is now in the list of content-types (that can be disabled), so it should be completed soon anyway.

I just realized this, and it is kind of disappointing, that this request was edited at some point and is almost entirely different from the original request -- originally it was about providing controls to give users reputation for specific edits on the history tab, and now it is about automatically rewarding reputation points based on other factors.

I have gone ahead and moved the new request to a separate request because it's important that the original request be handled on its own.
The new request for automatic reputation rewards is here: https://www.vaultwiki.org/issues/3935/

Reputation for comments makes its return in RC 2. I've added reputation for edits to our task list for RC 3 -- it's just a matter of adding the necessary control link and possibly showing the reputation in the new-style history bits.

This suggestion can conflict with the automatic rewarding of reputation. Because if contributors are automatically rewarded reputation and also get reputation per edit then they receive duplicate reputation for the same contributions. But if you add reputation for edits, and allow us to turn it off and to remove all edit reputation, then it could work well together. Because then we can use edit ratings until automatic reputation is implemented. At that point we can turn off the edit reputation function and remove the ratings given through the edits reputation function.

Edits reputation ratings are still very valuable until VW4.1 when automatic ratings are implemented.

Having reputation as an automatic reward for completing a task / achieving a particular quality score
is entirely different from
Someone actively choosing to give you reputation because they liked what you changed in your edit

They are not redundant functions.

It is like saying there's no need to have reputation for comments if we can automatically award reputation for article commenters. You can already "automatically reward" generic tasks like "made x edits" or "made x comments" in XenForo using its trophy system, so why bother having likes functionality for comments if you're going to get a trophy for making a certain number of comments anyway? Why bother having a trophy for X comments and a trophy for X likes?

They are not redundant. One is automatic for achieving a predetermined milestone. One is another user telling you that you did a good (or bad) job. There is value in having both functions, even in having both active at the same time.

That is why I was dismayed to discover that the original post was changed so dramatically. It was also problematic because the description in the OP did not match the description on the Donations page -- the original description was the one gathering donations.