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 25 | ← | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | Archive 31 | Archive 32 | → | Archive 35 |
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
A while back there was some discussion on whether pages tagged with CSD and PROD deletion tags should be marked as 'reviewed'. The general consensus was that deletion tagged articles got in the way of users flipping through the feed if they weren't marked as 'reviewed', and that it was fine to mark it as reviewed if you were willing to watch your PROD/CSD logs and/or watchlist carefully for inappropriate removals of the tag.
By marking them as reviewed, the downside is that it creates a single point of failure. Articles tagged for deletion often aren't fully reviewed with maintenance tags etc and If the previous reviewer doesn't notice that the deletion was declined, he/she might not return to the article to make sure that it gets a full review. Of more concern is if the author contests the PROD or inappropriately removes the CSD tag and the reviewer doesn't notice. In that case the article may be complete garbage and will fall out of the NewPagesFeed.
We now have a new filter at the NewPagesFeed that can filter out pages 'nominated for deletion' (CSD, PROD, and AfD, and soon to contain RfD as well), so we have a better solution for those that like to use the 'next' button; they can just uncheck 'nominated for deletion' and their system will just skip those articles in the queue.
Given that we have that filter, and people can filter them out before flipping through pages, I propose that we stop marking CSDed and PRODed articles as 'reviewed. As for AfD, and RfD, these are discussion based and the tag can't be inappropriately removed. If 'kept' at these venues, it is less important that these get checked over, because there is explicit community support for keeping them (this is less clear with 'no consensus' results, but I think we are safe after something goes through AfD as there have been plenty of eyes on it).
Please discuss below. If there is support for this change, I will update the flowchart to remove 'mark as reviewed' for all the deletion options (except AfD), and I will also request in Phabricator that the tool be updated to not mark articles as reviewed automatically when tagging for deletion with the PC toolbar. — Insertcleverphrasehere ( or here) 07:26, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
Show patrolled edits | Hide bots | Show redirects
Hi everybody,
I trawled through the
Suggestions page for as much stuff as I could. I filed Phabricator tasks for all of them, which are listed below. Now we need to decide what of these tasks we should add to the Community Wishlist proposal. Do you want to add all of them? Do you dislike one or two? Do you want to only submit a few key elements? Please add your opinions to the 'Survey' section below, and any other comments in the 'Discussion' section.
The deadlines for the Community Wishlist Survey are:
So we have a bit of time to make up our mind on what the proposal should contain. Sorry the list is so long, but the WMF has been quite neglectful. — Insertcleverphrasehere ( or here) 16:08, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Category | Phab ID | Topic | Difficulty | Benefit to NPP | Priority? |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bug Fixes: | * T169441: | Capacity to handle 2nd+ AfD nominations (currently bugs out and posts to the bottom of the first AfD page) | Medium | High T | High (bug that means it isn't safe to use PC tools to AfD) |
Bug Fixes: | * T207477: | 'All public logs' for a given page lists the 'page curation log' reviews, but not 'patrol log' reviews | Easy | Medium | High (sometimes difficult to find who reviewed the article if they used Twinkle) - Fix proposed at Phab pending code review |
Bug Fixes: | * T157046: | Redirects with RfD tags should still display in the New Pages Feed as redirects (actually as 'Nominated for Deletion' per above section) | Easy? | Medium | Moderate (consensus above) |
Bug Fixes: | * T92621: | Implement addition of un-redirected pages to Special:NewPages and Special:NewPagesFeed (articles converted to redirects are sent to the feed, they should be sent back out again automatically if that edit is reverted) | Hard | Medium | High (results in waste of reviewers time, should be automated) |
Bug Fixes: | * T157048: | Redirects converted into articles should appear in the New Pages Feed indexed by the date of creation and creator of the new article, not of the original redirect | Medium | High | High (Frequent annoyance drops them at the back of the queue, or worse, the middle) |
Done | Template was deleted at TfD as an alternative solution. | ||||
Page curation toolbar: | * T207485: | Enable page curation tools to be loaded on any page (optionally) | Easy | High | High |
Page curation toolbar: | * T207225: | Add "welcome newbie" button to Page Curation Toolbar | Medium | Low T | Low? |
Page curation toolbar: | * T207435: | Decline CSD added to Page Curation Toolbar | Medium | Low ** | Low? |
Page curation toolbar: | * T207230: | Adding some missing features to Page Curation Toolbar for CSD tagging | Medium | Medium T | Moderate? |
Page curation toolbar: | * T124396: | Allow moving to draftspace and tagging accordingly (add draftification to page curation tools) | Medium | High ** | Low (We have a good script, but this could also be ported directly) |
Page curation toolbar: | * T207441: | Page curation 'High Quality Submission' options (DYK and autopatrolled suggestion message options for creators) | Easy? | Medium ** | Low (would be useful but not essential) |
Page curation toolbar: | * T207438: | Page curation toolbar: allow a reviewer to mark a page as 'under review' and warn others at Special:NewPagesFeed | Easy? | Medium | Moderate |
Page curation toolbar: | * T207439: | Dragable Corners on Page Curation toolbar windows (for resizing) | Easy? | Medium | High (per DGG, see talk below) |
Page curation toolbar: | * T207442: | Send Message to creator without needing to 'unreview'/'re-review' the article | Easy? | High | High (repeatedly requested annoyance) |
Page curation toolbar: | * T207444: | Page Curation tools, option to 'report editor to AIV' for blatantly blockably created pages (when CSD tagging articles) | Medium | Medium T | Moderate (would be nice to bring it up to Twinkle standard) |
Page curation toolbar: | Done | Done, template with id ranges can be added via the 'copyright violations' section of the page curation toolbar. | |||
{{sources exist}} to Page Curation Toolbar |
Done | Can be accomplished on wiki -requested and being tested | |||
Done | Last gadget in the list at preferences. | ||||
Special:NewPagesFeed filtering: | * T169120: | Allow filtering by no citations in page curation | Easy? | High ** | High (NPP browser has this functionality, but not many of the other filters, and it is important to be able to filter multiple things at the same time) |
Special:NewPagesFeed filtering: | * T167475: | Allow filtering by date range in Special:NewPagesFeed | Hard? | High | High (repeatedly requested, even the NPP browser doesn't do this) |
Special:NewPagesFeed filtering: | * T207238: | Special:NewPageFeed filter by estimated public interest (e.g. filter by pageviews to enable prioritisation of high traffic articles) | Hard? | High | High (We are article triage, and this would be VERY useful) |
Special:NewPagesFeed filtering: | * T189929: | Add "previously deleted" as a possible issue (flagged in red) in the New Pages Feed/Page Curation Tool | Medium | High ** | High (to help identify COIs) |
Special:NewPagesFeed filtering: | * T157051: | Implement a new icon for patrolled pages that have maintenance tags in the New Pages Feed | Medium? | Low | Low (not essential as once 'reviewed' they aren't our problem) |
NPP Messaging System: | * T207452: | Reviewer Notes system in Page Curation Tools: system for reviewers to flag talk page comments on new pages to other reviewers | Hard? | High | High (per unanimous strong support in section below) |
NPP Messaging System: | * T207443: | Tagging Feedback in Page Curation Tools should also be sent to talk page | Medium? | High | High (per unanimous strong support in section below) |
Uncategorised: | * T207446: | Automatically flag articles that have been overwritten as 'unreviewed' | Hard | High | Moderate (Looks like it might be very difficult, but this would be good for the Wiki) |
Uncategorised: | * T207237: | Page Curation Tools to add userspace CSD Log/PROD Log functionality | Medium? | High T | High (repeatedly requested, hard to track CSD logs in PC Log) |
Done | Can be accomplished on wiki -requested and being tested | ||||
Uncategorised: | * T204465: | Allow users to disable Page Curation's "I have unreviewed a page you curated" message | Medium? | Low | Low |
Uncategorised: | * T207437: | Special:NewPagesFeed auto-refresh (similar to the 'Live Updates' button for watchlists) | Hard | Medium | Discuss (might be very hard for moderate benefit) |
Uncategorised: | Not done | Low | (currently no consensus that this is an improvement) | ||
Uncategorised: | * T42135: | Make "redirects" included by default in PageTriage (tick the redirect button by default for new patrollers) | Easy | Low | Low (mainly to clue new reviewers that redirects are part of the job) |
New Suggestions: | * T207757: | Adding a "Potential COI" alert to the feed | Easy | High | Should be easy as there is already an edit filter, high benefit. |
New Suggestions: | * T207759: | Option in New Pages Feed to 'skip viewed articles'. | Easy? | Moderate | Moderate |
New Suggestions: | * T207761: | Keyword Search for New Pages Feed | Moderate? | High | High |
New Suggestions: | * T207847: | 'Potential Issues' flagged in Page Curation Toolbar Page Info flyout | Hard? | High | Very High benefit. These issues are currently invisible when flicking through pages (unless going to the page directly from the feed) |
** - Other tool exists (linked).
T - Currently accomplished via Twinkle.
@ Barkeep49: per your !vote in the survey above: I don't mind the idea of separating bug fixes from improvements. One way to mitigate the workload would be to also have the list of improvements organised by priority level. It is reasonable that our list is really long, we have been neglected for several years. Not all of the above stuff needs to be finished tomorrow, or even in 2019. I expect that some of the lower priority items on the above list will still have the team working on them into 2020, that's OK, but they need to know that NPP is a core function of the wiki that needs support. If they need to hire an extra programmer to work on tools for us, I suggest we nominate Evad37 for the job 😉. — Insertcleverphrasehere ( or here) 22:12, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Off Topic
|
---|
|
And we should also perhaps state that we would ideally like to have additional resources allocated to new page review, so that we do not adversely impact the development of other stuff on the Community Wishlist from getting done.I suggest this bears highlighting as an important point (both "politically" and for practical future development). -- Elmidae ( talk · contribs) 19:38, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
Pinging all contributors: Barkeep49, Ozzie10aaaa, Vexations, Winged Blades of Godric, Kudpung, CASSIOPEIA, Atsme, Ajpolino, Usernamekiran, Elmidae, Araratic, K.e.coffman, Galobtter, Rosguill, SshibumXZ, DGG. — Insertcleverphrasehere ( or here) 10:10, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
A 'Reviewer notes' system could be VERY useful (task T207452 in the table above). What I envision: Reviewers could write a comment in a field in the Page Curation toolbar, which would then copy this note to the talk page and create a section with a unique header "New page reviewers' comments" (or similar). Also, all messages sent to authors would also be copied to this section on the talk page (task T207443 in the table above). The page curation tool would scan for a section with this exact header whenever the page was loaded up and automatically notify future reviewers that another reviewer left a comment, this ensures that whenever another reviewer looks at the page, they immediately know that someone else already left a note on the talk page. While the talk page can currently be used in this manner in the same way, reviewers won't always check this for new articles, as there are rarely content comments on new articles. Reviewers could then comment via the talk page directly (under the same header). I think this would be a useful feature. I would change the NPP flowchart, adding a bit saying that if at any point you are unsure and decide to stop the review, you should leave a note using this system with your findings so far. While a script could be easily written to automatically make a small window briefly pop up saying: "There are reviewer comments on the talk page!" (at least for as long as the article is in the NewPagesFeed), this really needs to be integrated in the PC tools if you want to have the sort of buy-in that will actually make it work (e.g. when you use the system you want some assurance that all reviewers/admins will also be notified of comments). Please discuss! — Insertcleverphrasehere ( or here) 07:45, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
While we're here discussing the Reviewer of the year award, please see this nomination to get Insertcleverphrasehere a t-shirt from the WMF. Power~enwiki also has an active nomination there. Cheers, Polyamorph ( talk) 11:52, 5 November 2018 (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 25 | ← | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | Archive 31 | Archive 32 | → | Archive 35 |
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
A while back there was some discussion on whether pages tagged with CSD and PROD deletion tags should be marked as 'reviewed'. The general consensus was that deletion tagged articles got in the way of users flipping through the feed if they weren't marked as 'reviewed', and that it was fine to mark it as reviewed if you were willing to watch your PROD/CSD logs and/or watchlist carefully for inappropriate removals of the tag.
By marking them as reviewed, the downside is that it creates a single point of failure. Articles tagged for deletion often aren't fully reviewed with maintenance tags etc and If the previous reviewer doesn't notice that the deletion was declined, he/she might not return to the article to make sure that it gets a full review. Of more concern is if the author contests the PROD or inappropriately removes the CSD tag and the reviewer doesn't notice. In that case the article may be complete garbage and will fall out of the NewPagesFeed.
We now have a new filter at the NewPagesFeed that can filter out pages 'nominated for deletion' (CSD, PROD, and AfD, and soon to contain RfD as well), so we have a better solution for those that like to use the 'next' button; they can just uncheck 'nominated for deletion' and their system will just skip those articles in the queue.
Given that we have that filter, and people can filter them out before flipping through pages, I propose that we stop marking CSDed and PRODed articles as 'reviewed. As for AfD, and RfD, these are discussion based and the tag can't be inappropriately removed. If 'kept' at these venues, it is less important that these get checked over, because there is explicit community support for keeping them (this is less clear with 'no consensus' results, but I think we are safe after something goes through AfD as there have been plenty of eyes on it).
Please discuss below. If there is support for this change, I will update the flowchart to remove 'mark as reviewed' for all the deletion options (except AfD), and I will also request in Phabricator that the tool be updated to not mark articles as reviewed automatically when tagging for deletion with the PC toolbar. — Insertcleverphrasehere ( or here) 07:26, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
Show patrolled edits | Hide bots | Show redirects
Hi everybody,
I trawled through the
Suggestions page for as much stuff as I could. I filed Phabricator tasks for all of them, which are listed below. Now we need to decide what of these tasks we should add to the Community Wishlist proposal. Do you want to add all of them? Do you dislike one or two? Do you want to only submit a few key elements? Please add your opinions to the 'Survey' section below, and any other comments in the 'Discussion' section.
The deadlines for the Community Wishlist Survey are:
So we have a bit of time to make up our mind on what the proposal should contain. Sorry the list is so long, but the WMF has been quite neglectful. — Insertcleverphrasehere ( or here) 16:08, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Category | Phab ID | Topic | Difficulty | Benefit to NPP | Priority? |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bug Fixes: | * T169441: | Capacity to handle 2nd+ AfD nominations (currently bugs out and posts to the bottom of the first AfD page) | Medium | High T | High (bug that means it isn't safe to use PC tools to AfD) |
Bug Fixes: | * T207477: | 'All public logs' for a given page lists the 'page curation log' reviews, but not 'patrol log' reviews | Easy | Medium | High (sometimes difficult to find who reviewed the article if they used Twinkle) - Fix proposed at Phab pending code review |
Bug Fixes: | * T157046: | Redirects with RfD tags should still display in the New Pages Feed as redirects (actually as 'Nominated for Deletion' per above section) | Easy? | Medium | Moderate (consensus above) |
Bug Fixes: | * T92621: | Implement addition of un-redirected pages to Special:NewPages and Special:NewPagesFeed (articles converted to redirects are sent to the feed, they should be sent back out again automatically if that edit is reverted) | Hard | Medium | High (results in waste of reviewers time, should be automated) |
Bug Fixes: | * T157048: | Redirects converted into articles should appear in the New Pages Feed indexed by the date of creation and creator of the new article, not of the original redirect | Medium | High | High (Frequent annoyance drops them at the back of the queue, or worse, the middle) |
Done | Template was deleted at TfD as an alternative solution. | ||||
Page curation toolbar: | * T207485: | Enable page curation tools to be loaded on any page (optionally) | Easy | High | High |
Page curation toolbar: | * T207225: | Add "welcome newbie" button to Page Curation Toolbar | Medium | Low T | Low? |
Page curation toolbar: | * T207435: | Decline CSD added to Page Curation Toolbar | Medium | Low ** | Low? |
Page curation toolbar: | * T207230: | Adding some missing features to Page Curation Toolbar for CSD tagging | Medium | Medium T | Moderate? |
Page curation toolbar: | * T124396: | Allow moving to draftspace and tagging accordingly (add draftification to page curation tools) | Medium | High ** | Low (We have a good script, but this could also be ported directly) |
Page curation toolbar: | * T207441: | Page curation 'High Quality Submission' options (DYK and autopatrolled suggestion message options for creators) | Easy? | Medium ** | Low (would be useful but not essential) |
Page curation toolbar: | * T207438: | Page curation toolbar: allow a reviewer to mark a page as 'under review' and warn others at Special:NewPagesFeed | Easy? | Medium | Moderate |
Page curation toolbar: | * T207439: | Dragable Corners on Page Curation toolbar windows (for resizing) | Easy? | Medium | High (per DGG, see talk below) |
Page curation toolbar: | * T207442: | Send Message to creator without needing to 'unreview'/'re-review' the article | Easy? | High | High (repeatedly requested annoyance) |
Page curation toolbar: | * T207444: | Page Curation tools, option to 'report editor to AIV' for blatantly blockably created pages (when CSD tagging articles) | Medium | Medium T | Moderate (would be nice to bring it up to Twinkle standard) |
Page curation toolbar: | Done | Done, template with id ranges can be added via the 'copyright violations' section of the page curation toolbar. | |||
{{sources exist}} to Page Curation Toolbar |
Done | Can be accomplished on wiki -requested and being tested | |||
Done | Last gadget in the list at preferences. | ||||
Special:NewPagesFeed filtering: | * T169120: | Allow filtering by no citations in page curation | Easy? | High ** | High (NPP browser has this functionality, but not many of the other filters, and it is important to be able to filter multiple things at the same time) |
Special:NewPagesFeed filtering: | * T167475: | Allow filtering by date range in Special:NewPagesFeed | Hard? | High | High (repeatedly requested, even the NPP browser doesn't do this) |
Special:NewPagesFeed filtering: | * T207238: | Special:NewPageFeed filter by estimated public interest (e.g. filter by pageviews to enable prioritisation of high traffic articles) | Hard? | High | High (We are article triage, and this would be VERY useful) |
Special:NewPagesFeed filtering: | * T189929: | Add "previously deleted" as a possible issue (flagged in red) in the New Pages Feed/Page Curation Tool | Medium | High ** | High (to help identify COIs) |
Special:NewPagesFeed filtering: | * T157051: | Implement a new icon for patrolled pages that have maintenance tags in the New Pages Feed | Medium? | Low | Low (not essential as once 'reviewed' they aren't our problem) |
NPP Messaging System: | * T207452: | Reviewer Notes system in Page Curation Tools: system for reviewers to flag talk page comments on new pages to other reviewers | Hard? | High | High (per unanimous strong support in section below) |
NPP Messaging System: | * T207443: | Tagging Feedback in Page Curation Tools should also be sent to talk page | Medium? | High | High (per unanimous strong support in section below) |
Uncategorised: | * T207446: | Automatically flag articles that have been overwritten as 'unreviewed' | Hard | High | Moderate (Looks like it might be very difficult, but this would be good for the Wiki) |
Uncategorised: | * T207237: | Page Curation Tools to add userspace CSD Log/PROD Log functionality | Medium? | High T | High (repeatedly requested, hard to track CSD logs in PC Log) |
Done | Can be accomplished on wiki -requested and being tested | ||||
Uncategorised: | * T204465: | Allow users to disable Page Curation's "I have unreviewed a page you curated" message | Medium? | Low | Low |
Uncategorised: | * T207437: | Special:NewPagesFeed auto-refresh (similar to the 'Live Updates' button for watchlists) | Hard | Medium | Discuss (might be very hard for moderate benefit) |
Uncategorised: | Not done | Low | (currently no consensus that this is an improvement) | ||
Uncategorised: | * T42135: | Make "redirects" included by default in PageTriage (tick the redirect button by default for new patrollers) | Easy | Low | Low (mainly to clue new reviewers that redirects are part of the job) |
New Suggestions: | * T207757: | Adding a "Potential COI" alert to the feed | Easy | High | Should be easy as there is already an edit filter, high benefit. |
New Suggestions: | * T207759: | Option in New Pages Feed to 'skip viewed articles'. | Easy? | Moderate | Moderate |
New Suggestions: | * T207761: | Keyword Search for New Pages Feed | Moderate? | High | High |
New Suggestions: | * T207847: | 'Potential Issues' flagged in Page Curation Toolbar Page Info flyout | Hard? | High | Very High benefit. These issues are currently invisible when flicking through pages (unless going to the page directly from the feed) |
** - Other tool exists (linked).
T - Currently accomplished via Twinkle.
@ Barkeep49: per your !vote in the survey above: I don't mind the idea of separating bug fixes from improvements. One way to mitigate the workload would be to also have the list of improvements organised by priority level. It is reasonable that our list is really long, we have been neglected for several years. Not all of the above stuff needs to be finished tomorrow, or even in 2019. I expect that some of the lower priority items on the above list will still have the team working on them into 2020, that's OK, but they need to know that NPP is a core function of the wiki that needs support. If they need to hire an extra programmer to work on tools for us, I suggest we nominate Evad37 for the job 😉. — Insertcleverphrasehere ( or here) 22:12, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Off Topic
|
---|
|
And we should also perhaps state that we would ideally like to have additional resources allocated to new page review, so that we do not adversely impact the development of other stuff on the Community Wishlist from getting done.I suggest this bears highlighting as an important point (both "politically" and for practical future development). -- Elmidae ( talk · contribs) 19:38, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
Pinging all contributors: Barkeep49, Ozzie10aaaa, Vexations, Winged Blades of Godric, Kudpung, CASSIOPEIA, Atsme, Ajpolino, Usernamekiran, Elmidae, Araratic, K.e.coffman, Galobtter, Rosguill, SshibumXZ, DGG. — Insertcleverphrasehere ( or here) 10:10, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
A 'Reviewer notes' system could be VERY useful (task T207452 in the table above). What I envision: Reviewers could write a comment in a field in the Page Curation toolbar, which would then copy this note to the talk page and create a section with a unique header "New page reviewers' comments" (or similar). Also, all messages sent to authors would also be copied to this section on the talk page (task T207443 in the table above). The page curation tool would scan for a section with this exact header whenever the page was loaded up and automatically notify future reviewers that another reviewer left a comment, this ensures that whenever another reviewer looks at the page, they immediately know that someone else already left a note on the talk page. While the talk page can currently be used in this manner in the same way, reviewers won't always check this for new articles, as there are rarely content comments on new articles. Reviewers could then comment via the talk page directly (under the same header). I think this would be a useful feature. I would change the NPP flowchart, adding a bit saying that if at any point you are unsure and decide to stop the review, you should leave a note using this system with your findings so far. While a script could be easily written to automatically make a small window briefly pop up saying: "There are reviewer comments on the talk page!" (at least for as long as the article is in the NewPagesFeed), this really needs to be integrated in the PC tools if you want to have the sort of buy-in that will actually make it work (e.g. when you use the system you want some assurance that all reviewers/admins will also be notified of comments). Please discuss! — Insertcleverphrasehere ( or here) 07:45, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
While we're here discussing the Reviewer of the year award, please see this nomination to get Insertcleverphrasehere a t-shirt from the WMF. Power~enwiki also has an active nomination there. Cheers, Polyamorph ( talk) 11:52, 5 November 2018 (UTC)