![]() | This page 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. |
On New Pages Feed, if I set it to show me only unreviewed pages, sorted oldest first, it shows the oldest unreviewed page as being from 30 May. 168 days ago. At the bottom of the page, it says "(oldest: 244 days old)". Why the disparity? — Tom Morris ( talk) 16:07, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
The curation toolbar has not been loading now for about 8 hours.
MacOS 10.8.3. FireFox 25.0.1
Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 00:56, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
It will be great, if this bar will be available as a separate gadget, without Page feed. -- Rezonansowy ( talk • contribs) 13:51, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi! I've noticed a bug in the Page Curation Tool. When I use it to tag an article to be speedily deleted under A10 (Recently created article that duplicates an existing topic), it automatically sends a notification to authors talk page. But, the problem is that the notification looks like this (for example):
Hello Hore55,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged List of airports in Western Norway for deletion, because it appears to duplicate an existing Wikipedia article, [[{{{article}}}]].
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Vanjagenije ( talk) 10:38, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
See: insted of the title of the article , there is just empty [[{{{article}}}]]. This need to be fixed. Vanjagenije ( talk) 22:31, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi, a few of us have been combatting a block evading IP hopper. IE, One of their common practices is to create massive user page link farms favoring their pet causes. I'd like to be able to search user space for new pages over X bytes. Our friend's template is currently over 200,000 bytes, but the filter would be most useful if it could be customized. Thanks NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 22:38, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
The "refresh list" button at the bottom of the page doesn't work. I'm using Firefox 26.0, and Mac OSX 9. Acalycine talk 07:45, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
When I was checking Arrayán (TV series), there was a red flag noting that the originator user: Lgcsmasamiya was blocked. The user was not blocked at the time the article was created and was not blocked at the time I was reviewing the article. Since it is hard to imagine how a blocked user could create an article anyway, I was wondering whether we needed this feature? Op47 ( talk) 17:51, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
Per resolution of this Village Pump proposal, orphan tags are now to be placed on the talk page, not the article page. AWB & Twinkle are implementing this and a bot is in work to move existing orphan templates to the talk page (see this discussion if interested in details). The Curation Toolbar will also need to be updated. Thanks. -- JLaTondre ( talk) 14:36, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
attempts to use the Prod function of article curation lead to a "missing parameter" error DGG ( talk ) 01:07, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
There isn't any "Empty section" template
![]() | This section is empty. You can help by
adding to it. (January 2014) |
in page curation toolbar, we have to manually edit the page and add the template. Admins please add this to toolbar and makes it easier for editors. UBS talk 04:56, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
[ [1]] seems to be showing a lot of these errors at the moment. Op47 ( talk) 20:49, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Travis Thiessen (hist) · pagetriage-bytes: Object doesn't support this property or method · pagetriage-edits: Object doesn't support this property or method · pagetriage-categories: Object doesn't support this property or method · No citations
Created by Jasonstru (talk | contribs) · pagetriage-editcount: Object doesn't support this property or method
Travis Thiessen (born July 11, 1972) is a Canadian retired professional ice hockey defenseman who played over 700 games across North America and Eu...
Right clicking on this and selecting open in new window gets the article with a menu at the right hand side. Clicking on info gets the following:
This page is still unreviewed.
This page was created on 28 July 2013 by Jasonstru (talk | contribs) pagetriage-editcount: Object doesn't support this property or method Stats: pagetriage-bytes: Object doesn't support this property or method · pagetriage-edits: Object doesn't support this property or method · pagetriage-categories: Object doesn't support this property or method
Possible issues No citations - This page does not cite any sources.
History pagetriage-edits: Object doesn't support this property or method · show full history 20 August 2013
•19:13 · Cydebot · Robot - Moving category Peoria Rivermen players to Category:Peoria Rivermen (AHL) players per CFD at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 August 13.
2 August 2013
•00:50 · Purplebackpack89 · played for both ECHL and IHL Peoria Rivermen
28 July 2013
•12:43 · Jasonstru · ←Created page with '{{Infobox ice hockey player | played_for = Cleveland Lumberjacks
Colorado Gold Kings
Flint Generals
Indianapolis Ice
London Knights...'
Clicking on the heart gets:
Select the names of editors you wish to thank.
Jasonstru – pagetriage-wikilove-edit-count: Object doesn't support this property or method, Page Creator
Purplebackpack89 – pagetriage-wikilove-edit-count: Object doesn't support this property or method
Cydebot – pagetriage-wikilove-edit-count: Object doesn't support this property or method
Clicking on the tick gets:
Mark this page as reviewed if you're done checking it.
Add a message for the creator: (optional)pagetriage-characters-left: Object doesn't support this property or method
Clicking on tag gets a normal display (although intermittently, the list of types of tags appears below the "check list box" of tags, making it difficult to add new tags.
and delete gets a normal display.
Clicking on minimise correctly reduces the menu
Clicking on next page correctly goes to the next page
Going back to the info "flyout", Right clicking on a user, say Purplebackpack89 and selecting open in new windows gets you the user page. Clicking on user contributions gets his contributions and clicking on edit count gets you his edit count.
Hope this all helps.
Op47 (
talk) 20:00, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
When I press the review link on the new pages feed it opens the new page but doesn't open the page curation toolbar. StudiesWorld ( talk) 22:28, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
There should be an option, actually multiple options when tagging an article for notability concern. I believe as there are subject-specific notability guideline, there should options accordingly to make it easy for initial contributor to understand. Anup Mehra ✈ 15:08, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
I have no idea if this is happening only to me, but I thought I should let you know.-- Tco03displays ( talk) 23:39, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
... the thing is nice, but it doesn't look like an RSS feed. -- Gryllida ( talk) 23:58, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Leitrim Minor Football Championship was created in January of this year (2014) but has a tag dated for March of 2013. - Ad Orientem ( talk) 18:40, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
I just wanted to check in to find out whether this tool leaves a default summary when a 'curator' checks a page/article? I encountered some strange activity on a number of pages on my watchlist and received email notifications of activity without any apparent activity and sans even an 'nx' summary.
This has all been triggered by one particular user of the tool who hasn't responded to my queries as to whether it's a bug or something he's forgetting to do in order to alert watchers of having come through and leaving watchers to wonder whether the page has been redirected (or some other form of naughty activity).
I'm happy to provide details should you need them. My thanks in advance. -- Iryna Harpy ( talk) 06:16, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Having got a notification that my new page had been reviewed I looked for an explanation of what that meant; I thought it might include an evaluation of the page. Since this is about the tooling, it is obviously the wrong place, but it is where I ended up. I think that the notification should include a link to help the recipient to understand what it means; a link on WP:Page Curation (not just when you start added a section to the talk) would also help. WP:NPP seems better than nothing as an explanation, but is aimed more at reviewers than the reviewed. PJTraill ( talk) 22:19, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Page Curation/Help is the page linked directly from
Special:NewPagesFeed. On the old
Special:Newpages there is an editnotice with a number of procedure suggestions, including "'Don't bite the newcomers: cleanup tagging within minutes of creation can discourage new users. Consider using Twinkle to welcome newcomers, and placing {{
uw-draftfirst}} on their talk page if a first effort needs deleting;
On Wikipedia:New pages patrol there are more such procedural suggestions. Both pages include a request to patrol from the back of the queue, and not to tag for speedy deletion to quickly, particularly for A1 and A3. Little or none of this is directly on Wikipedia:Page Curation/Help, although it is on pages linked to from there.
Is there a way to put some of this directly at the top of the new pages feed, or failing that at least put it on Wikipedia:Page Curation/Help directly, so it is more likely to be seen by NPPs as they are patrolling or preparing to? This might help avoid some conflicts and errors in tagging that now occur. DES (talk) 22:32, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Would we want to please add such option to the newpagesfeed? Gryllida ( talk) 04:18, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Who created a page should not matter for a page reviewer. Please remove the display of the count, to prevent bias against newcomers (editor retention). Gryllida ( talk) 04:20, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
I seem to have accidentally enabled this toolbar, and now I can't get rid of it. Apparently there should be a cross at the top of the toolbar, but it's not visible for me. (Firefox 19.02 running on Windows 7). Any ideas? Optimist on the run ( talk) 14:37, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
I started with it today. But after the first page, it failed to load. It also did not showcase my entries, and I had to redo the same from edit source. Although the tool seems nice and easy, it should also give an option of executing whenever required if someone closes it by mistake. So, like an .exe file or a .zip file, from where this can be launched. Vishal Bakhai 09:57, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
It appears Page Curation is having trouble nominating a page for deletion at AfD for a second time. Usually, to nominate a page for deletion at AfD, a page titled "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGE TITLE" is created. However, if the title has been nominated for deletion for a second time, a page titled "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGE TITLE (2nd nomination)" should be created instead. Page Curation appears to just be adding a nomination at the bottom of the first nomination page. This happened with the page Syed Abdul Rasheed Koya Thangal. It was nominated for deletion once before at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syed Abdul Rasheed Koya Thangal and deleted. The page has since been recreated and nominated for deletion again by Mabalu ( talk · contribs) using Page Curation. The tool tagged the page with the AfD notice appropriately, but added the nomination to the end of the first nomination page see diff. The nomination should have been created at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syed Abdul Rasheed Koya Thangal (2nd nomination), which it has since been moved to. Mz7 ( talk) 19:38, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
Please allow up to 3 url's when marking an article for deletion for {{
Db-G12}}
, as the template is accepting up to 3. (
t)
Josve05a (
c) 18:46, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
My pagecuration tollbar is not showing Hison Here ( talk) 08:27, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
This extension has been mentioned on the French WP Village Pump and I said a consensus should be shown before we ask for it, so a poll page was started and so far almost everybody seems to want it. Next day on the talk page someone noticed that bugzilla:48552 to make the extension "agnostic" and suitable for our WP has the lowest priority, and on bugzilla:42322#c1 in a similar case details were asked about the local deletion process but the installation was not done.
Could somebody tell us more there on the poll talk page: is this hopeless, or could it be adapted to our deletion process, or could we just ignore the deletion part and keep the rest? If you do not know French, there are enough people on the French WP who know English and will be willing to translate. Thank you in advance: Oliv0 ( talk) 05:40, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
My Page Curation tool bar is not appearing check. Hison Here ( talk) 08:48, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Hey friends, I'm having a trouble. I want to add something in the script used by Page curation. I frequently use Page curation to review pages. And honestly I always use Page curation to request articles for CSD. But I often face a problem to keep track of those article. (I sometime have 100 edits per day) And I have 1800 articles on my watchlist. So, I can't track if the article is deleted or the deletion tag has been removed by the author. So I want to add some code to the MediaWiki script so that it can create a subpage similar to User:Jim Cartar/CSD log created by TW. And it will update whenever Page curation is used to add a CSD tag. I think it will also help other users to keep a record. Jim Carter ( talk) 18:17, 3 June 2014 (UTC) P.S. Just leave me a talkback when some respond to this proposal. Thank you. Jim Carter ( talk) 19:11, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
I have another problem. I often use my mobile phone (Android 4.2) to edit pages (even this edit is made by my phone). So I was thinking if MediaWiki developers can enable Page curation for mobile too. Thanks. Jim Carter ( talk) 07:06, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Steps to reproduce:
Expected behavior: The "Page Info" panel shows that the page has no categories but that the page is tagged as such (perhaps by not using the red text and/or suppressing the red number on the toolbar).
Actual behavior: The "Page Info" panel ignores that you've already tagged the page, adds "No Categories" to the "Potential Issues" section and shows an alert on the toolbar.
APerson ( talk!) 12:47, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi all. I discovered this tool today when a summer student I'm looking after was told that their user page had been reviewed. The notice didn't make it clear what the review was about, and it looked initially like it was a review of the user rather than of their user page. It would be good to make the echo notification a bit more obvious, and perhaps so that it links back to this page or a general page about what 'reviewed' means?
Also: enabling the curation toolbar is really non-obvious. Shouldn't it appear under Preferences/Gadgets or Beta? If it's there, I can't spot it. It seems that you turn it on by visiting the new pages feed, then clicking on one of the articles, after which it sometimes appears and sometimes doesn't, and not always in the same place on the page? (At one point it appeared on the bottom-left of the page rather than the right-hand side for some reason.)
Hope this feedback helps! Thanks. Mike Peel ( talk) 15:58, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
PageCuration should support tagging and rating pages during review. A user script does the tagging and rating. I think that these two processes — tagging at least — would be useful to do during a page review. -- Gryllida ( talk) 05:14, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
I've been looking at the articles by new users recommended for deletion in the last couple of days and am rather alarmed to see that 40% of these recommendations are made within 10 minutes of the article first appearing (based on a sample of about 50). Indeed I've seen 8 examples where it's happened within 2 minutes. I think it's fairly obvious that this behaviour will have a very negative effect on the new user. In the example that alerted me to it, they hadn't made another edit in 4 months. I won't be able to give a comparable estimate for a month or two as stats are unavailable to me once the article has been deleted.
I'm not arguing about the intrinsic worth of any of these articles but rather that the tool is too powerful in the hands of inexperienced editors. e.g. when one presses the Delete button on the Curation Toolbar, it alerts the user that the article is only 2 minutes old, but fails to point out that it's by a new user (although stated policy is that it shouldn't happen within 10-15 minutes.) Even experienced editors make mistakes when they first put up a new article and if WP was fulfilling its duty of care, the response to the first mistake should be an offer of help not a brusque "We don't want you" message. That may be impracticable but one thing that's obvious is that this tactic is hurting particularly those from developing countries whose first language isn't English. The documentation for these tools have even omitted the old Don't bite the newcomers adage from the New Pages page.
Even in a couple of days I'm learning to distinguish those editors who make timely and helpful suggestions from those who don't seem to take any care. Is the use of these tools subject to any monitoring by WP? If it isn't, could I suggest that such monitoring is needed. Chris55 ( talk) 15:21, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
@ Kudpung: you've provided this theory (that we have a large number of patrols by inexperienced editors, or a large number of inexperienced patrollers) before. I've gathered data to validate or invalidate it and found it incorrect, and presented that data to you. In the absence of an explanation as to why the data is missing something I would suggest making a different argument.
We should require the patrollers to demonstrate competence, and to remove from patrolling those people who do not show it. Access to NPP and the curation bar should be limited to the same standard as AfC. This is a direction that is worth pursuing. (it's limited, because the raw NP log is still available, but that's not so attractive to beginners) Kudpung, your opinion? Ironholds, we need your continued input. You have more experience than Kudpung or I on what is practical to program. DGG ( talk ) 21:14, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Delaying A7 at NPP would help, and this is a policy change that the community can adopt by itself. (It would need to be implemented by programming, but if there is a clear policy requirement for something, a programming solution has always been found). It would be more effective to delay A7 altogether, at NP as well as NPP, and we could certainly try proposing it. I think there's a reasonable chance of adoption. Again the community could adopt this by itself. I suspect it will be more difficult to program, but it should be possible. And at least it can be enacted as forbidden, which will give us a good response to those who do it.
Delaying NPP altogether has the danger of delaying action on more critical problems than A7. This is a real difficulty, because the immediate removal of dangerous material is a potent deterrent. In the past, this has prevented any such solution to the problem. It might be more acceptable now, because we could do it on NPP while retaining it for NP. And we have much more effective edit filters that in the past--the extensive amount of utter junk present 7 years ago when I started doing this is much diminished.
More generally, when encouraging new editors to become active in WP process, we need to arrange some means of either teaching them or checking that they have educated themselves. The safest deletion process for beginners to work on is AfD discussions, where there will be other people looking in a very visible way, and usually bad arguments are corrected. WP has always relied on the correction of errors by cooperative editing of many people, and the problems with NPP (and AfC) is that they rely instead on single individuals. The model simply does not work in such cases. Individuals can only be relied on if they are screened, tested, and audited. The usual argument against this, is who will have the time to do it, but looked at from a broader perspective, it saves time in the end because there will be fewer errors that need extensive work & discussion, and more new editors will stay with us. (One of the clearest of all research results, is that people whose first article is deleted very rarely continue). DGG ( talk ) 21:14, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Working on this page: /info/en/?search=Kirby_Burkholder
No toolbar popped, no "Curate this page" link on the lefthand side. Chrome, up to date. Also, I noticed on another page that the toolbar only showed up if I opened visual editor and then closed it. Save me Ironholds! Nathan T 21:37, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
About two hours ago, when looking for Special:NewPages, I accidentally visited Special:NewPagesFeed, and now, when I visit certain pages like Dina Rae (singer), the Page Curation bar appears, which I don't want, because it hides content and you have to scroll the page up and down to see what's behind it. Wikipedia:Page Curation#Curation Toolbar says that I "can close that toolbar by clicking on the 'x' icon—or minimize it by clicking on the icon to the right" - but there is no an 'x' icon, and of the seven icons, which are all in a vertical column, which is the "icon to the right"? -- Redrose64 ( talk) 19:29, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
I see indications like "no sources" at Special:NewPagesFeed, and that those are called "Page Info". Can we get this information for other pages, e.g. for the Draft namespace? This would be useful in AfC for reviewing newcomers' articles (see e.g. this suggestion). Reviewing there is coordinated by this helper script. Jodi.a.schneider ( talk) 15:49, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Has there been any concensus over whether the newer page curation functionality has completely superseded the new page patrol, as both the patrol log and curation log still exist, however when using the curation toolbar the Mark page as patrolled link disappears, so you are unable to mark it as 'patrolled', only 'reviewed'. Mschamberlain ( talk) 12:18, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Can this toolbar (PC features) be made to appear on pages which are a bit older? It seems to me that it works only for very new pages. I often review articles which were create days before, like those at User:AlexNewArtBot/PolandSearchResult. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:30, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
As far as I can tell, redirects that are turned into independent pages don't appear in New Pages. This seems like a major loophole leading to content forks. Any possibility of these kinds of pages being added? Possibly with an "expanded from redirect" tag? — Swpb talk 21:14, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
The curation toolbar never shows up for me; is that just me, or is it happening for other people? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fimatic ( talk • contribs) 00:32, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
(Continued from here: User_talk:Fimatic#Orphan tag on a new article you patrolled .3F)
A few days ago I created a new article that User:Fimatic took the time to patrol, using Wikipedia:Page Curation.
The article was created as an orphan. Within 3 minutes from its creation there was another article linking to it. (And within seconds from its creation, there was a link to its translation on the Danish wikipedia).
In spite of that, several hours later Fimatic sees that the article is an orphan and places an orphan tag in the article.
The next day when I noticed the tag I removed it, since it clearly did not apply (and never did).
So to sum up:
1) The Page Curation tool causes one wikipedian (Fimatic) to spend time tagging an article, that does not need this tag (any longer).
2) (The article thus presents outdated information).
3) Another wikipedian (me) spends time removing the tag.
This seems to be a not optimal way to spend the editors time and it seems that the issue can be fixed by trying to have the page curation tool present a more up-to-date status to the new page patrollers.
(I am aware that by creating a redlink to the article prior to creating the article itself, this timing issue should be prevented but that seems more like a work-around than a solution).
PS. Since a little while articles created by me on the Danish wikipedia are autopatrolled (based on a half-dozen creations). I actually have a lot more experience with the English wikipedia and I frankly think that there is little gained by having new page patrollers review articles I create here. Is there a place where I can suggest that articles I create become autopatrolled also on the English wikipedia? Thanks.
Lklundin ( talk) 13:59, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
It's usually a good thing that Page Info lists "No citations" under "Possible issues", but not in the case of disambiguation pages, which are explicitly not supposed to have citations. Could the Page Curation toolbar be modified to prevent this warning from appearing on any page containing {{ disambiguation}}, {{ hndis}}, or any of the other variations and aliases for dab tags? Is there a more appropriate place to propose such a change? Thanks! — Swpb talk 15:33, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
Curation Toolbar does not seem to work for me since this morning. I can't mark the page as reviewed and the review mark remains "grey" when I click on it (review option does not pop-out). Are there any technical issues here? -- BiH ( talk) 15:54, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Doesn't work for me either: I try Prod or AfD and get "Tag afd is missing required parameter." Imaginatorium ( talk) 09:04, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
Same for me: can't mark stuff as reviewed. I wonder if nudging
Okeyes might get the relevant people at the Foundation to push the relevant buttons to make this work again.
—
Tom Morris (
talk) 15:50, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
I have the same problem, all buttons work fine except the tick and tag buttons. Although the deletion button works, this is very strange. Is there a fix? Arbustum ( talk) 17:28, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
I have a problem. When I click the Mark as reviewed (tick) button, the button does not respond/do anything. Another problem is the add tags button which has the same problem. Other buttons work fine, including the nominate page for deletion button. Is there are fix to this? Thank you. Arbustum ( talk) 17:26, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
This should be working now - please confirm. Emergency fix deployed, and staff have been staying well after normal hours to keep an eye on it. Ping me if there are further problems. -- Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 03:31, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Christmas Eve bug-fix deployed (with much thanks to
SPage and
MFlaschen) specifically
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/181752/ (something something jQuery update broke old parameters something).
Everything should work now - I've tested a few tags, and PROD, and they all work as expected - but let me know if it doesn't, and I'll investigate on Monday.
Happy Holidays to you all, and kudos for the damn fine task you do here. :) --
Quiddity (WMF)
(talk) 00:46, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello! While using the Page Curation toolbar, I noticed that {{ Not English}} isn't an available tag. Could it be considered as a future addition? Have a great day, MJ94 ( talk) 07:57, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
I have not done NPP for a while (I guess a couple of months), and today I had some spare time, but whatever I tried, I could not find the review interface anymore. (I have my que counted from the oldest, so I tried the three oldest unreviewed entries and a couple of more, always with the same effect). Am I the only one who can not access the interface, or is it a generic problem?-- Ymblanter ( talk) 11:58, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
This has been talked about almost two years ago (see Wikipedia_talk:Page_Curation/Archive_6#.23_of_articles), but is there any chance of this being fixed? The number in the upper right corner changes when you change a "Show:" filter (unreviewed pages, reviewed pages, etc.), but not when you change a "That:" filter (have no categories, are orphaned, etc.). ~EdGl ! 02:11, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
This is creating a huge backlog at Category:Stubs (which is a deprecated category) because it tags things with Template:Stub, instead of one of the many other stub templates. Liam987 (talk) 00:43, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
For some reason, I can not access page curation from the new pages feed. I can still edit wikitext, but I do not have page curation. - Will2022 ( talk) 20:50, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
For me at least, when I use New Page Patrol, often the usernames and corresponding talk pages of users with user and talk pages will show up in red rather than blue. Does anyone know why this might be happening? Everymorning talk 23:35, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
There are times when a reviewed article is marked as unreviewed so that it will remain in the queue so other reviewers can still see it. This is sometimes necessary when overly eager page reviewers improperly or prematurely tags an article. Unreviewing should not generate a user talk page notification unless the text box has a message in it. It consistently generates confusion ( example). I propose that the WMF developers responsible for this functionality change it so that a notification is not sent if the text field is empty.
As autoconfirmed user with more than 500 edits and over 37 articles and familiar with Wikipedia guidelines, can i use page curation log to mark new articles as reviewed?Is it require prior permission? Zarghun11 ( talk) 15:34, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm not sure if anyone's going to respond to this (I've been thinking about it a lot) but I'm concerned with the amount of articles that are attended to (adding tags, etc.) but are not actually marked as reviewed. I personally have spent a lot of time to mark these as reviewed to ensure it was attended to. I'm given to understand Twinkle/etc. does not mark the article as reviewed. Is this accurate? I wish more articles would actually be marked as it would save time. SwisterTwister talk 05:03, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Articles that have been nominated for deletion keep coming up as "reviewed" or "unreviewed" in the feed, instead of having the black garbage can icon. -- Sammy1339 ( talk) 17:38, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
I suggest removal of the last sentence of the lead, which reads To learn more about patrolling new pages in general, please see the check list of recommended tasks and tutorial at WP:NPP, and consider enrolling at the New Page Patrol School.
New Page Patrollers are asked to be particularly vigilant for pages suspected as being created or edited by paid users. The criteria to check are listed at Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Orangemoody. More background on this important story of enormous abuse is at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2015-09-02/Special report.
Generally, inexperienced or too rapid patrolling are the main reasons that such articles get patrolled and slip through the net. If patrollers come across pages they don't know what to do with, they can leave them and pass on to the next one. Ideally however, they should not be too embarrassed to ask for help at New pages patrol/Noticeboard. -- Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 06:35, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
I happened to see these edits after linking to an AFD from someone's talk page. I moved that nomination to a second discussion page, and then did some digging around. The original deletion discussion was closed as a redirect back on August 28 of last year. Based on the page history, it looks as though the article was deleted and then recreated as a redirect. So I'm guessing that page curation assumed it had never been AFD'd before and thought it was creating a new AFD page, rather than appending to a long-closed one. When I used Twinkle to redo the AFD, it correctly went to a (2nd nomination) page, but I'm not certain it would have behaved correctly if there hadn't already been an attempt by Page Curation. — Torchiest talk edits 20:37, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
Filtering for user name in the New pages feed does not work for me on Chrome. It doesn't let me write anything in the text box. -- Ita140188 ( talk) 07:15, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Works for me. Have you tried a different browser? -- Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 12:52, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Why very old pages (some from 2001) keep appearing when sorting the feed from oldest articles? As an example, this page is currently tagged as unpatrolled: Band. I really don't understand why this page should be in the list at all. -- Ita140188 ( talk) 08:04, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This page 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. |
On New Pages Feed, if I set it to show me only unreviewed pages, sorted oldest first, it shows the oldest unreviewed page as being from 30 May. 168 days ago. At the bottom of the page, it says "(oldest: 244 days old)". Why the disparity? — Tom Morris ( talk) 16:07, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
The curation toolbar has not been loading now for about 8 hours.
MacOS 10.8.3. FireFox 25.0.1
Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 00:56, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
It will be great, if this bar will be available as a separate gadget, without Page feed. -- Rezonansowy ( talk • contribs) 13:51, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi! I've noticed a bug in the Page Curation Tool. When I use it to tag an article to be speedily deleted under A10 (Recently created article that duplicates an existing topic), it automatically sends a notification to authors talk page. But, the problem is that the notification looks like this (for example):
Hello Hore55,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged List of airports in Western Norway for deletion, because it appears to duplicate an existing Wikipedia article, [[{{{article}}}]].
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Vanjagenije ( talk) 10:38, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
See: insted of the title of the article , there is just empty [[{{{article}}}]]. This need to be fixed. Vanjagenije ( talk) 22:31, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi, a few of us have been combatting a block evading IP hopper. IE, One of their common practices is to create massive user page link farms favoring their pet causes. I'd like to be able to search user space for new pages over X bytes. Our friend's template is currently over 200,000 bytes, but the filter would be most useful if it could be customized. Thanks NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 22:38, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
The "refresh list" button at the bottom of the page doesn't work. I'm using Firefox 26.0, and Mac OSX 9. Acalycine talk 07:45, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
When I was checking Arrayán (TV series), there was a red flag noting that the originator user: Lgcsmasamiya was blocked. The user was not blocked at the time the article was created and was not blocked at the time I was reviewing the article. Since it is hard to imagine how a blocked user could create an article anyway, I was wondering whether we needed this feature? Op47 ( talk) 17:51, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
Per resolution of this Village Pump proposal, orphan tags are now to be placed on the talk page, not the article page. AWB & Twinkle are implementing this and a bot is in work to move existing orphan templates to the talk page (see this discussion if interested in details). The Curation Toolbar will also need to be updated. Thanks. -- JLaTondre ( talk) 14:36, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
attempts to use the Prod function of article curation lead to a "missing parameter" error DGG ( talk ) 01:07, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
There isn't any "Empty section" template
![]() | This section is empty. You can help by
adding to it. (January 2014) |
in page curation toolbar, we have to manually edit the page and add the template. Admins please add this to toolbar and makes it easier for editors. UBS talk 04:56, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
[ [1]] seems to be showing a lot of these errors at the moment. Op47 ( talk) 20:49, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Travis Thiessen (hist) · pagetriage-bytes: Object doesn't support this property or method · pagetriage-edits: Object doesn't support this property or method · pagetriage-categories: Object doesn't support this property or method · No citations
Created by Jasonstru (talk | contribs) · pagetriage-editcount: Object doesn't support this property or method
Travis Thiessen (born July 11, 1972) is a Canadian retired professional ice hockey defenseman who played over 700 games across North America and Eu...
Right clicking on this and selecting open in new window gets the article with a menu at the right hand side. Clicking on info gets the following:
This page is still unreviewed.
This page was created on 28 July 2013 by Jasonstru (talk | contribs) pagetriage-editcount: Object doesn't support this property or method Stats: pagetriage-bytes: Object doesn't support this property or method · pagetriage-edits: Object doesn't support this property or method · pagetriage-categories: Object doesn't support this property or method
Possible issues No citations - This page does not cite any sources.
History pagetriage-edits: Object doesn't support this property or method · show full history 20 August 2013
•19:13 · Cydebot · Robot - Moving category Peoria Rivermen players to Category:Peoria Rivermen (AHL) players per CFD at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 August 13.
2 August 2013
•00:50 · Purplebackpack89 · played for both ECHL and IHL Peoria Rivermen
28 July 2013
•12:43 · Jasonstru · ←Created page with '{{Infobox ice hockey player | played_for = Cleveland Lumberjacks
Colorado Gold Kings
Flint Generals
Indianapolis Ice
London Knights...'
Clicking on the heart gets:
Select the names of editors you wish to thank.
Jasonstru – pagetriage-wikilove-edit-count: Object doesn't support this property or method, Page Creator
Purplebackpack89 – pagetriage-wikilove-edit-count: Object doesn't support this property or method
Cydebot – pagetriage-wikilove-edit-count: Object doesn't support this property or method
Clicking on the tick gets:
Mark this page as reviewed if you're done checking it.
Add a message for the creator: (optional)pagetriage-characters-left: Object doesn't support this property or method
Clicking on tag gets a normal display (although intermittently, the list of types of tags appears below the "check list box" of tags, making it difficult to add new tags.
and delete gets a normal display.
Clicking on minimise correctly reduces the menu
Clicking on next page correctly goes to the next page
Going back to the info "flyout", Right clicking on a user, say Purplebackpack89 and selecting open in new windows gets you the user page. Clicking on user contributions gets his contributions and clicking on edit count gets you his edit count.
Hope this all helps.
Op47 (
talk) 20:00, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
When I press the review link on the new pages feed it opens the new page but doesn't open the page curation toolbar. StudiesWorld ( talk) 22:28, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
There should be an option, actually multiple options when tagging an article for notability concern. I believe as there are subject-specific notability guideline, there should options accordingly to make it easy for initial contributor to understand. Anup Mehra ✈ 15:08, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
I have no idea if this is happening only to me, but I thought I should let you know.-- Tco03displays ( talk) 23:39, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
... the thing is nice, but it doesn't look like an RSS feed. -- Gryllida ( talk) 23:58, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Leitrim Minor Football Championship was created in January of this year (2014) but has a tag dated for March of 2013. - Ad Orientem ( talk) 18:40, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
I just wanted to check in to find out whether this tool leaves a default summary when a 'curator' checks a page/article? I encountered some strange activity on a number of pages on my watchlist and received email notifications of activity without any apparent activity and sans even an 'nx' summary.
This has all been triggered by one particular user of the tool who hasn't responded to my queries as to whether it's a bug or something he's forgetting to do in order to alert watchers of having come through and leaving watchers to wonder whether the page has been redirected (or some other form of naughty activity).
I'm happy to provide details should you need them. My thanks in advance. -- Iryna Harpy ( talk) 06:16, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Having got a notification that my new page had been reviewed I looked for an explanation of what that meant; I thought it might include an evaluation of the page. Since this is about the tooling, it is obviously the wrong place, but it is where I ended up. I think that the notification should include a link to help the recipient to understand what it means; a link on WP:Page Curation (not just when you start added a section to the talk) would also help. WP:NPP seems better than nothing as an explanation, but is aimed more at reviewers than the reviewed. PJTraill ( talk) 22:19, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Page Curation/Help is the page linked directly from
Special:NewPagesFeed. On the old
Special:Newpages there is an editnotice with a number of procedure suggestions, including "'Don't bite the newcomers: cleanup tagging within minutes of creation can discourage new users. Consider using Twinkle to welcome newcomers, and placing {{
uw-draftfirst}} on their talk page if a first effort needs deleting;
On Wikipedia:New pages patrol there are more such procedural suggestions. Both pages include a request to patrol from the back of the queue, and not to tag for speedy deletion to quickly, particularly for A1 and A3. Little or none of this is directly on Wikipedia:Page Curation/Help, although it is on pages linked to from there.
Is there a way to put some of this directly at the top of the new pages feed, or failing that at least put it on Wikipedia:Page Curation/Help directly, so it is more likely to be seen by NPPs as they are patrolling or preparing to? This might help avoid some conflicts and errors in tagging that now occur. DES (talk) 22:32, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Would we want to please add such option to the newpagesfeed? Gryllida ( talk) 04:18, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Who created a page should not matter for a page reviewer. Please remove the display of the count, to prevent bias against newcomers (editor retention). Gryllida ( talk) 04:20, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
I seem to have accidentally enabled this toolbar, and now I can't get rid of it. Apparently there should be a cross at the top of the toolbar, but it's not visible for me. (Firefox 19.02 running on Windows 7). Any ideas? Optimist on the run ( talk) 14:37, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
I started with it today. But after the first page, it failed to load. It also did not showcase my entries, and I had to redo the same from edit source. Although the tool seems nice and easy, it should also give an option of executing whenever required if someone closes it by mistake. So, like an .exe file or a .zip file, from where this can be launched. Vishal Bakhai 09:57, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
It appears Page Curation is having trouble nominating a page for deletion at AfD for a second time. Usually, to nominate a page for deletion at AfD, a page titled "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGE TITLE" is created. However, if the title has been nominated for deletion for a second time, a page titled "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGE TITLE (2nd nomination)" should be created instead. Page Curation appears to just be adding a nomination at the bottom of the first nomination page. This happened with the page Syed Abdul Rasheed Koya Thangal. It was nominated for deletion once before at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syed Abdul Rasheed Koya Thangal and deleted. The page has since been recreated and nominated for deletion again by Mabalu ( talk · contribs) using Page Curation. The tool tagged the page with the AfD notice appropriately, but added the nomination to the end of the first nomination page see diff. The nomination should have been created at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syed Abdul Rasheed Koya Thangal (2nd nomination), which it has since been moved to. Mz7 ( talk) 19:38, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
Please allow up to 3 url's when marking an article for deletion for {{
Db-G12}}
, as the template is accepting up to 3. (
t)
Josve05a (
c) 18:46, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
My pagecuration tollbar is not showing Hison Here ( talk) 08:27, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
This extension has been mentioned on the French WP Village Pump and I said a consensus should be shown before we ask for it, so a poll page was started and so far almost everybody seems to want it. Next day on the talk page someone noticed that bugzilla:48552 to make the extension "agnostic" and suitable for our WP has the lowest priority, and on bugzilla:42322#c1 in a similar case details were asked about the local deletion process but the installation was not done.
Could somebody tell us more there on the poll talk page: is this hopeless, or could it be adapted to our deletion process, or could we just ignore the deletion part and keep the rest? If you do not know French, there are enough people on the French WP who know English and will be willing to translate. Thank you in advance: Oliv0 ( talk) 05:40, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
My Page Curation tool bar is not appearing check. Hison Here ( talk) 08:48, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Hey friends, I'm having a trouble. I want to add something in the script used by Page curation. I frequently use Page curation to review pages. And honestly I always use Page curation to request articles for CSD. But I often face a problem to keep track of those article. (I sometime have 100 edits per day) And I have 1800 articles on my watchlist. So, I can't track if the article is deleted or the deletion tag has been removed by the author. So I want to add some code to the MediaWiki script so that it can create a subpage similar to User:Jim Cartar/CSD log created by TW. And it will update whenever Page curation is used to add a CSD tag. I think it will also help other users to keep a record. Jim Carter ( talk) 18:17, 3 June 2014 (UTC) P.S. Just leave me a talkback when some respond to this proposal. Thank you. Jim Carter ( talk) 19:11, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
I have another problem. I often use my mobile phone (Android 4.2) to edit pages (even this edit is made by my phone). So I was thinking if MediaWiki developers can enable Page curation for mobile too. Thanks. Jim Carter ( talk) 07:06, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Steps to reproduce:
Expected behavior: The "Page Info" panel shows that the page has no categories but that the page is tagged as such (perhaps by not using the red text and/or suppressing the red number on the toolbar).
Actual behavior: The "Page Info" panel ignores that you've already tagged the page, adds "No Categories" to the "Potential Issues" section and shows an alert on the toolbar.
APerson ( talk!) 12:47, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi all. I discovered this tool today when a summer student I'm looking after was told that their user page had been reviewed. The notice didn't make it clear what the review was about, and it looked initially like it was a review of the user rather than of their user page. It would be good to make the echo notification a bit more obvious, and perhaps so that it links back to this page or a general page about what 'reviewed' means?
Also: enabling the curation toolbar is really non-obvious. Shouldn't it appear under Preferences/Gadgets or Beta? If it's there, I can't spot it. It seems that you turn it on by visiting the new pages feed, then clicking on one of the articles, after which it sometimes appears and sometimes doesn't, and not always in the same place on the page? (At one point it appeared on the bottom-left of the page rather than the right-hand side for some reason.)
Hope this feedback helps! Thanks. Mike Peel ( talk) 15:58, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
PageCuration should support tagging and rating pages during review. A user script does the tagging and rating. I think that these two processes — tagging at least — would be useful to do during a page review. -- Gryllida ( talk) 05:14, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
I've been looking at the articles by new users recommended for deletion in the last couple of days and am rather alarmed to see that 40% of these recommendations are made within 10 minutes of the article first appearing (based on a sample of about 50). Indeed I've seen 8 examples where it's happened within 2 minutes. I think it's fairly obvious that this behaviour will have a very negative effect on the new user. In the example that alerted me to it, they hadn't made another edit in 4 months. I won't be able to give a comparable estimate for a month or two as stats are unavailable to me once the article has been deleted.
I'm not arguing about the intrinsic worth of any of these articles but rather that the tool is too powerful in the hands of inexperienced editors. e.g. when one presses the Delete button on the Curation Toolbar, it alerts the user that the article is only 2 minutes old, but fails to point out that it's by a new user (although stated policy is that it shouldn't happen within 10-15 minutes.) Even experienced editors make mistakes when they first put up a new article and if WP was fulfilling its duty of care, the response to the first mistake should be an offer of help not a brusque "We don't want you" message. That may be impracticable but one thing that's obvious is that this tactic is hurting particularly those from developing countries whose first language isn't English. The documentation for these tools have even omitted the old Don't bite the newcomers adage from the New Pages page.
Even in a couple of days I'm learning to distinguish those editors who make timely and helpful suggestions from those who don't seem to take any care. Is the use of these tools subject to any monitoring by WP? If it isn't, could I suggest that such monitoring is needed. Chris55 ( talk) 15:21, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
@ Kudpung: you've provided this theory (that we have a large number of patrols by inexperienced editors, or a large number of inexperienced patrollers) before. I've gathered data to validate or invalidate it and found it incorrect, and presented that data to you. In the absence of an explanation as to why the data is missing something I would suggest making a different argument.
We should require the patrollers to demonstrate competence, and to remove from patrolling those people who do not show it. Access to NPP and the curation bar should be limited to the same standard as AfC. This is a direction that is worth pursuing. (it's limited, because the raw NP log is still available, but that's not so attractive to beginners) Kudpung, your opinion? Ironholds, we need your continued input. You have more experience than Kudpung or I on what is practical to program. DGG ( talk ) 21:14, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Delaying A7 at NPP would help, and this is a policy change that the community can adopt by itself. (It would need to be implemented by programming, but if there is a clear policy requirement for something, a programming solution has always been found). It would be more effective to delay A7 altogether, at NP as well as NPP, and we could certainly try proposing it. I think there's a reasonable chance of adoption. Again the community could adopt this by itself. I suspect it will be more difficult to program, but it should be possible. And at least it can be enacted as forbidden, which will give us a good response to those who do it.
Delaying NPP altogether has the danger of delaying action on more critical problems than A7. This is a real difficulty, because the immediate removal of dangerous material is a potent deterrent. In the past, this has prevented any such solution to the problem. It might be more acceptable now, because we could do it on NPP while retaining it for NP. And we have much more effective edit filters that in the past--the extensive amount of utter junk present 7 years ago when I started doing this is much diminished.
More generally, when encouraging new editors to become active in WP process, we need to arrange some means of either teaching them or checking that they have educated themselves. The safest deletion process for beginners to work on is AfD discussions, where there will be other people looking in a very visible way, and usually bad arguments are corrected. WP has always relied on the correction of errors by cooperative editing of many people, and the problems with NPP (and AfC) is that they rely instead on single individuals. The model simply does not work in such cases. Individuals can only be relied on if they are screened, tested, and audited. The usual argument against this, is who will have the time to do it, but looked at from a broader perspective, it saves time in the end because there will be fewer errors that need extensive work & discussion, and more new editors will stay with us. (One of the clearest of all research results, is that people whose first article is deleted very rarely continue). DGG ( talk ) 21:14, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Working on this page: /info/en/?search=Kirby_Burkholder
No toolbar popped, no "Curate this page" link on the lefthand side. Chrome, up to date. Also, I noticed on another page that the toolbar only showed up if I opened visual editor and then closed it. Save me Ironholds! Nathan T 21:37, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
About two hours ago, when looking for Special:NewPages, I accidentally visited Special:NewPagesFeed, and now, when I visit certain pages like Dina Rae (singer), the Page Curation bar appears, which I don't want, because it hides content and you have to scroll the page up and down to see what's behind it. Wikipedia:Page Curation#Curation Toolbar says that I "can close that toolbar by clicking on the 'x' icon—or minimize it by clicking on the icon to the right" - but there is no an 'x' icon, and of the seven icons, which are all in a vertical column, which is the "icon to the right"? -- Redrose64 ( talk) 19:29, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
I see indications like "no sources" at Special:NewPagesFeed, and that those are called "Page Info". Can we get this information for other pages, e.g. for the Draft namespace? This would be useful in AfC for reviewing newcomers' articles (see e.g. this suggestion). Reviewing there is coordinated by this helper script. Jodi.a.schneider ( talk) 15:49, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Has there been any concensus over whether the newer page curation functionality has completely superseded the new page patrol, as both the patrol log and curation log still exist, however when using the curation toolbar the Mark page as patrolled link disappears, so you are unable to mark it as 'patrolled', only 'reviewed'. Mschamberlain ( talk) 12:18, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Can this toolbar (PC features) be made to appear on pages which are a bit older? It seems to me that it works only for very new pages. I often review articles which were create days before, like those at User:AlexNewArtBot/PolandSearchResult. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:30, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
As far as I can tell, redirects that are turned into independent pages don't appear in New Pages. This seems like a major loophole leading to content forks. Any possibility of these kinds of pages being added? Possibly with an "expanded from redirect" tag? — Swpb talk 21:14, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
The curation toolbar never shows up for me; is that just me, or is it happening for other people? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fimatic ( talk • contribs) 00:32, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
(Continued from here: User_talk:Fimatic#Orphan tag on a new article you patrolled .3F)
A few days ago I created a new article that User:Fimatic took the time to patrol, using Wikipedia:Page Curation.
The article was created as an orphan. Within 3 minutes from its creation there was another article linking to it. (And within seconds from its creation, there was a link to its translation on the Danish wikipedia).
In spite of that, several hours later Fimatic sees that the article is an orphan and places an orphan tag in the article.
The next day when I noticed the tag I removed it, since it clearly did not apply (and never did).
So to sum up:
1) The Page Curation tool causes one wikipedian (Fimatic) to spend time tagging an article, that does not need this tag (any longer).
2) (The article thus presents outdated information).
3) Another wikipedian (me) spends time removing the tag.
This seems to be a not optimal way to spend the editors time and it seems that the issue can be fixed by trying to have the page curation tool present a more up-to-date status to the new page patrollers.
(I am aware that by creating a redlink to the article prior to creating the article itself, this timing issue should be prevented but that seems more like a work-around than a solution).
PS. Since a little while articles created by me on the Danish wikipedia are autopatrolled (based on a half-dozen creations). I actually have a lot more experience with the English wikipedia and I frankly think that there is little gained by having new page patrollers review articles I create here. Is there a place where I can suggest that articles I create become autopatrolled also on the English wikipedia? Thanks.
Lklundin ( talk) 13:59, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
It's usually a good thing that Page Info lists "No citations" under "Possible issues", but not in the case of disambiguation pages, which are explicitly not supposed to have citations. Could the Page Curation toolbar be modified to prevent this warning from appearing on any page containing {{ disambiguation}}, {{ hndis}}, or any of the other variations and aliases for dab tags? Is there a more appropriate place to propose such a change? Thanks! — Swpb talk 15:33, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
Curation Toolbar does not seem to work for me since this morning. I can't mark the page as reviewed and the review mark remains "grey" when I click on it (review option does not pop-out). Are there any technical issues here? -- BiH ( talk) 15:54, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Doesn't work for me either: I try Prod or AfD and get "Tag afd is missing required parameter." Imaginatorium ( talk) 09:04, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
Same for me: can't mark stuff as reviewed. I wonder if nudging
Okeyes might get the relevant people at the Foundation to push the relevant buttons to make this work again.
—
Tom Morris (
talk) 15:50, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
I have the same problem, all buttons work fine except the tick and tag buttons. Although the deletion button works, this is very strange. Is there a fix? Arbustum ( talk) 17:28, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
I have a problem. When I click the Mark as reviewed (tick) button, the button does not respond/do anything. Another problem is the add tags button which has the same problem. Other buttons work fine, including the nominate page for deletion button. Is there are fix to this? Thank you. Arbustum ( talk) 17:26, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
This should be working now - please confirm. Emergency fix deployed, and staff have been staying well after normal hours to keep an eye on it. Ping me if there are further problems. -- Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 03:31, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Christmas Eve bug-fix deployed (with much thanks to
SPage and
MFlaschen) specifically
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/181752/ (something something jQuery update broke old parameters something).
Everything should work now - I've tested a few tags, and PROD, and they all work as expected - but let me know if it doesn't, and I'll investigate on Monday.
Happy Holidays to you all, and kudos for the damn fine task you do here. :) --
Quiddity (WMF)
(talk) 00:46, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello! While using the Page Curation toolbar, I noticed that {{ Not English}} isn't an available tag. Could it be considered as a future addition? Have a great day, MJ94 ( talk) 07:57, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
I have not done NPP for a while (I guess a couple of months), and today I had some spare time, but whatever I tried, I could not find the review interface anymore. (I have my que counted from the oldest, so I tried the three oldest unreviewed entries and a couple of more, always with the same effect). Am I the only one who can not access the interface, or is it a generic problem?-- Ymblanter ( talk) 11:58, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
This has been talked about almost two years ago (see Wikipedia_talk:Page_Curation/Archive_6#.23_of_articles), but is there any chance of this being fixed? The number in the upper right corner changes when you change a "Show:" filter (unreviewed pages, reviewed pages, etc.), but not when you change a "That:" filter (have no categories, are orphaned, etc.). ~EdGl ! 02:11, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
This is creating a huge backlog at Category:Stubs (which is a deprecated category) because it tags things with Template:Stub, instead of one of the many other stub templates. Liam987 (talk) 00:43, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
For some reason, I can not access page curation from the new pages feed. I can still edit wikitext, but I do not have page curation. - Will2022 ( talk) 20:50, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
For me at least, when I use New Page Patrol, often the usernames and corresponding talk pages of users with user and talk pages will show up in red rather than blue. Does anyone know why this might be happening? Everymorning talk 23:35, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
There are times when a reviewed article is marked as unreviewed so that it will remain in the queue so other reviewers can still see it. This is sometimes necessary when overly eager page reviewers improperly or prematurely tags an article. Unreviewing should not generate a user talk page notification unless the text box has a message in it. It consistently generates confusion ( example). I propose that the WMF developers responsible for this functionality change it so that a notification is not sent if the text field is empty.
As autoconfirmed user with more than 500 edits and over 37 articles and familiar with Wikipedia guidelines, can i use page curation log to mark new articles as reviewed?Is it require prior permission? Zarghun11 ( talk) 15:34, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm not sure if anyone's going to respond to this (I've been thinking about it a lot) but I'm concerned with the amount of articles that are attended to (adding tags, etc.) but are not actually marked as reviewed. I personally have spent a lot of time to mark these as reviewed to ensure it was attended to. I'm given to understand Twinkle/etc. does not mark the article as reviewed. Is this accurate? I wish more articles would actually be marked as it would save time. SwisterTwister talk 05:03, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Articles that have been nominated for deletion keep coming up as "reviewed" or "unreviewed" in the feed, instead of having the black garbage can icon. -- Sammy1339 ( talk) 17:38, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
I suggest removal of the last sentence of the lead, which reads To learn more about patrolling new pages in general, please see the check list of recommended tasks and tutorial at WP:NPP, and consider enrolling at the New Page Patrol School.
New Page Patrollers are asked to be particularly vigilant for pages suspected as being created or edited by paid users. The criteria to check are listed at Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Orangemoody. More background on this important story of enormous abuse is at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2015-09-02/Special report.
Generally, inexperienced or too rapid patrolling are the main reasons that such articles get patrolled and slip through the net. If patrollers come across pages they don't know what to do with, they can leave them and pass on to the next one. Ideally however, they should not be too embarrassed to ask for help at New pages patrol/Noticeboard. -- Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 06:35, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
I happened to see these edits after linking to an AFD from someone's talk page. I moved that nomination to a second discussion page, and then did some digging around. The original deletion discussion was closed as a redirect back on August 28 of last year. Based on the page history, it looks as though the article was deleted and then recreated as a redirect. So I'm guessing that page curation assumed it had never been AFD'd before and thought it was creating a new AFD page, rather than appending to a long-closed one. When I used Twinkle to redo the AFD, it correctly went to a (2nd nomination) page, but I'm not certain it would have behaved correctly if there hadn't already been an attempt by Page Curation. — Torchiest talk edits 20:37, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
Filtering for user name in the New pages feed does not work for me on Chrome. It doesn't let me write anything in the text box. -- Ita140188 ( talk) 07:15, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Works for me. Have you tried a different browser? -- Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 12:52, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Why very old pages (some from 2001) keep appearing when sorting the feed from oldest articles? As an example, this page is currently tagged as unpatrolled: Band. I really don't understand why this page should be in the list at all. -- Ita140188 ( talk) 08:04, 8 October 2015 (UTC)