![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
The steps in the "Planning a request" section does not seem to reflect how edit requests, at least from the COI side, seem to work. Very few edit requests seem to have started as non-templated discussions on the talk page; people go straight for the template. That is probably because the likelihood of someone seeing a non-templated request is low. Should this page reflect that reality, and if so, in what way? WhinyTheYounger (WtY)( talk, contribs) 21:21, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
As brought up in the previous discussion, no one gets consensus for edit requests. Very few edit requests attempt to establish consensus, and that is also rarely a reason they are denied. This is because it is an unnecessary step. When editors want to add content to an article, they just do it. They don’t have to propose changes on the talk page first. Why do editors suddenly have to get their changes confirmed just because the page is protected? For fully-protected pages, sure, it makes sense to require consensus. But anything else is both not how it actually works right now and unnecessary slowness added to the (already incredibly slow!) process. Snowmanonahoe ( talk) 02:26, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Given the number of requests that don't fully implement WP:EDITXY it seems like suggesting the use of {{ TextDiff}} or a similar template might be worthwhile. This might be a useful "stencil" for editors unfamiliar with ERs to use. Thoughts? -- N8wilson 🔔 00:20, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
I wasn't trying to make reading the docs mandatory. I just wanted to make this a recommendation on at least this page. It could be extended to the ERW and submit an edit request preloads. So, this recommendation has multiple levels:
1. Recommended on this policy page 2. Recommend in ERW preloads 3. Recommend in {{ Submit an edit request}} preloads None of these levels include requiring it. I advocate for all three. Aaron Liu ( talk) 22:09, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
{{TextDiff|ORIGINAL_TEXT|CHANGED_TEXT]}
from {{
request edit button}} for me to be convinced that adding it to further preloads is a good idea. Don't really care about 1 and 2.
* Pppery *
it has begun...
01:12, 19 July 2023 (UTC)I note the good faith request for a 3O, however there are three editors involved here, and others in the earlier and archived discussion on the topic. Perhaps you could try WP:Requests for Comment, the dispute resolution noticeboard, the talk page of a Wikiproject or one of the other WP:Dispute resolution options. With best wishes to all; Springnuts ( talk) 15:02, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
3O is usually flexible by allowing a few exceptions, like those involving mainly two editors with an extra editor having minimal participation. N8wilson only made one comment. Aaron Liu ( talk) 15:45, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
The page lacks advice on what to do if a request - especially a CoI request - is declined, and the reason the declining editor gives seems to be wrong, unfair, or based on a misreading of ether the request or Wikipedia policy. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:45, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
{{Edit COI}}
template for this proposed change." Greater clarity about this point would be beneficial.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
09:50, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
I do not know if this is the place to raise this issue, or if it should be checked on somewhere else (if I should ask elsewhere, I would greatly appreciate being pointed in the right direction). But I think the tool that automatically updates Category:Wikipedia semi-protected edit requests might not be functioning currently. Even after purging its cache, it still displays edit requests that I have already responded to and the last entry listed has the date and time of 2023-10-11 10:45. I have looked in on the list briefly several times over the last several hours and haven't noticed any new entries added. -- Pinchme123 ( talk) 00:58, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
Yesterday, I made an edit request on Talk:Gaza Strip. I realised I had made a mistake and changed it from "semi-protected" to "extended-protected". It did not appear in Category:Wikipedia extended-confirmed-protected edit requests. In case the change from "semi" to "extended" was the cause, I changed the date and time stamp. It still has not been logged. The thread is currently here. -- 2001:BB6:47ED:FA58:EDA4:1631:84EC:506D ( talk) 14:46, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
#editextendedprotected
in the URL). The bot only detects the first active request on the page. The first active request at the time on writing is the one from 9 October 2023. It is a relatively rare situation to have more than one active request on a talk page like that. That's why the bot doesn't have a feature to detect more than one requests.Anthony Quinlan date of birth is the 14th April 1984 his age is 38 not 39 92.11.104.42 ( talk) 07:41, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
The steps in the "Planning a request" section does not seem to reflect how edit requests, at least from the COI side, seem to work. Very few edit requests seem to have started as non-templated discussions on the talk page; people go straight for the template. That is probably because the likelihood of someone seeing a non-templated request is low. Should this page reflect that reality, and if so, in what way? WhinyTheYounger (WtY)( talk, contribs) 21:21, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
As brought up in the previous discussion, no one gets consensus for edit requests. Very few edit requests attempt to establish consensus, and that is also rarely a reason they are denied. This is because it is an unnecessary step. When editors want to add content to an article, they just do it. They don’t have to propose changes on the talk page first. Why do editors suddenly have to get their changes confirmed just because the page is protected? For fully-protected pages, sure, it makes sense to require consensus. But anything else is both not how it actually works right now and unnecessary slowness added to the (already incredibly slow!) process. Snowmanonahoe ( talk) 02:26, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Given the number of requests that don't fully implement WP:EDITXY it seems like suggesting the use of {{ TextDiff}} or a similar template might be worthwhile. This might be a useful "stencil" for editors unfamiliar with ERs to use. Thoughts? -- N8wilson 🔔 00:20, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
I wasn't trying to make reading the docs mandatory. I just wanted to make this a recommendation on at least this page. It could be extended to the ERW and submit an edit request preloads. So, this recommendation has multiple levels:
1. Recommended on this policy page 2. Recommend in ERW preloads 3. Recommend in {{ Submit an edit request}} preloads None of these levels include requiring it. I advocate for all three. Aaron Liu ( talk) 22:09, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
{{TextDiff|ORIGINAL_TEXT|CHANGED_TEXT]}
from {{
request edit button}} for me to be convinced that adding it to further preloads is a good idea. Don't really care about 1 and 2.
* Pppery *
it has begun...
01:12, 19 July 2023 (UTC)I note the good faith request for a 3O, however there are three editors involved here, and others in the earlier and archived discussion on the topic. Perhaps you could try WP:Requests for Comment, the dispute resolution noticeboard, the talk page of a Wikiproject or one of the other WP:Dispute resolution options. With best wishes to all; Springnuts ( talk) 15:02, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
3O is usually flexible by allowing a few exceptions, like those involving mainly two editors with an extra editor having minimal participation. N8wilson only made one comment. Aaron Liu ( talk) 15:45, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
The page lacks advice on what to do if a request - especially a CoI request - is declined, and the reason the declining editor gives seems to be wrong, unfair, or based on a misreading of ether the request or Wikipedia policy. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:45, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
{{Edit COI}}
template for this proposed change." Greater clarity about this point would be beneficial.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
09:50, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
I do not know if this is the place to raise this issue, or if it should be checked on somewhere else (if I should ask elsewhere, I would greatly appreciate being pointed in the right direction). But I think the tool that automatically updates Category:Wikipedia semi-protected edit requests might not be functioning currently. Even after purging its cache, it still displays edit requests that I have already responded to and the last entry listed has the date and time of 2023-10-11 10:45. I have looked in on the list briefly several times over the last several hours and haven't noticed any new entries added. -- Pinchme123 ( talk) 00:58, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
Yesterday, I made an edit request on Talk:Gaza Strip. I realised I had made a mistake and changed it from "semi-protected" to "extended-protected". It did not appear in Category:Wikipedia extended-confirmed-protected edit requests. In case the change from "semi" to "extended" was the cause, I changed the date and time stamp. It still has not been logged. The thread is currently here. -- 2001:BB6:47ED:FA58:EDA4:1631:84EC:506D ( talk) 14:46, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
#editextendedprotected
in the URL). The bot only detects the first active request on the page. The first active request at the time on writing is the one from 9 October 2023. It is a relatively rare situation to have more than one active request on a talk page like that. That's why the bot doesn't have a feature to detect more than one requests.Anthony Quinlan date of birth is the 14th April 1984 his age is 38 not 39 92.11.104.42 ( talk) 07:41, 28 March 2024 (UTC)