HRWiki talk:Recent changes patrol

From Homestar Runner Wiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Patrol a troll)
m (Reverted edits by 176.31.233.170 (Talk) to last revision by The Knights Who Say Ni)
Line 26: Line 26:
:::::Whoops, sorry.  Yeah, you're right.  Everything should be marked patrolled.  After one has dealt with the situation (reverting the page, adding the diff to the WikiTroll list) they should mark the edit as patrolled.[[User:Tom|<nowiki></nowiki>]]  --  [[User:Tom|Tom]] 16:16, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
:::::Whoops, sorry.  Yeah, you're right.  Everything should be marked patrolled.  After one has dealt with the situation (reverting the page, adding the diff to the WikiTroll list) they should mark the edit as patrolled.[[User:Tom|<nowiki></nowiki>]]  --  [[User:Tom|Tom]] 16:16, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
-
 
-
 
-
 
-
Pour la sécurisation des biens et des documents, l'idéal reste le [http://www.infosafe.fr/coffre-fort-ignifuge/coffre-fort-ignifuge.htm coffre-fort classe 1 ignifugé].
 
-
Il s'agit en fait d'une petite armoire forte ignifuge avec protection contre le vol.
 
== Marking new pages as patrolled ==
== Marking new pages as patrolled ==

Revision as of 10:47, 16 March 2014

Hello peoples,

It's Mas12806. There is a problem in Recent Changes. There is not enough patrolling on the special page. Even know the names at the bottom of the page is at a wide variety, people aren't watching the page, clicking diff, and hitting, "mark as patrolled" alot. I have realized this just today. Members of this committee, please try your best to do a little patrolling here with marking edits as patrolled. As I am also a member of this committee, I shall also mark edits too. Thanks! —Mas12806 (talk·contribs) 00:38, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

How do you join? -- The Real Zajac 11:32, 3 May 2005 (PDT)

Just add your name to the list and start patrollin'. Thanks for your interest. — wikisig.gif Joey (talk·edits) 18:42, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
I guess I already kind of do that... (Except for the marking pages as patrolled, I didn't know that.) What's the difference between just doing it and joining, except for that you HAVE to do it when you join? Kvb 20:41, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
There's not much difference, in all reality. We're simply trying to foster a feeling of belonging by forming these various committees. You're certainly free to patrol edits without adding your name to the list. — wikisig.gif Joey (talk·edits) 01:01, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
Well, I added my name anyways. I don't really have a feeling of belonging yet, though. We'll see... Kvb 10:40, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Contents

Patrol a troll

Do you mark an edit as patrolled if it's a trolling edit? --Gafaddict 23:28, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

No. Instead, copy the URL of the diff from your location bar and use that in your entry on the HRWiki:WikiTroll page. -- Tom 01:19, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
Why wouldn't it get marked as patrolled? "Patrolled" just means someone has seen the edit, it doesn't necessarily mean the edit was a good one. If I'm looking down the list and see an edit that isn't patrolled, then see that it was trolling, I'm likely to head over to the WikiTroll page myself and add the guy again. Doesn't it make sense to mark those so we don't duplicate our efforts? — wikisig.gif Joey (talk·edits) 15:11, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
Yes, perfect sense. I just encountered a similar situation where someone had already reverted a bad edit. I needed to patrol both the bad edit, and the edit that reverted the bad edit. This way, neither show up in the hidepartolled display. -- Tom 15:16, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
Sorry, Tom, you lost me. Are you advocating marking all edits as patrolled, or do you think we should leave bad edits as unpatrolled? — wikisig.gif Joey (talk·edits) 15:58, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
Whoops, sorry. Yeah, you're right. Everything should be marked patrolled. After one has dealt with the situation (reverting the page, adding the diff to the WikiTroll list) they should mark the edit as patrolled. -- Tom 16:16, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Marking new pages as patrolled

I found a couple new pages that weren't patrolled. It took me a while to figure it out myself, but it's a different process to mark a new page patrolled. Since there is no "diff" link from recent changes, you instead click on the article name. At the bottom right corner of the article, there's a link that says "Mark this new article as patrolled". Hope this is helpful. — wikisig.gif Joey (talk·edits) 15:59, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

And if it's a new page that then has an edit it's even more complicated - as far as I can tell no link lets you "Mark this article as patrolled" directly - you have to mark all the changes as patrolled so only the page creation remains, then hide patrolled edits. Then two bugs cancel each other out and you can do the procedure Joey says above on the page. The page displayed will appear to be the current revision, but clicking "Mark this article as patrolled" in the bottom right will mark the original page creation as patrolled. Convoluted? Yes. Works? Yes. --phlip TC 15:37, 8 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Is anyone else actually doing this?

I just single-handedly patrolled over a thousand edits (about 4 days worth). Took me about 8 hours in between tech support calls (today was a slow day). The recent changes screen is BEAUTIFUL right now. Not a red exclamation point to be found. I don't want to have to do this again, so everyone try to stay on top of it from now on. Thanks. — wikisig.gif Joey (talk·edits) 21:45, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

I've noticed that there's pages and pages of unpatrolled edits sometimes. Is there anyway to keep the Hide Patrolled option on? it's aggrivating to have to patroll an edit and then turn it back on every single time. mibluvr13 23:48, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
I do it everytime I see a red exclamation mark, but the past couple of days they have already been patrolled (by you, I'm guessing). →FireBird
I do it whenever I'm bored, which is a lot. --thatkidsam 19:33, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
I think our biggest challenge is going to be weekends and Mondays. I'm paging through the recent changes page this morning and, using some very rough calculations, I've counted approximately 2,800 edits. As I said, it took me eight hours to patrol a thousand last week. This is going to be a headache. [EDIT: LOL, I wasn't hiding the patrolled edits! My bad. There are really only about 600 unpatrolled edits from the weekend. That's not bad at all,

actually. We can probably knock these out this morning without breaking a sweat.] — wikisig.gif Joey (talk·edits) 14:35, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

How important is it to patrol every edit? -- Joshua 14:43, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
I suppose it's not super-important, but if people like our committee members are willing to patrol, it helps keep the wiki machine well-oiled. Believe it or not, there are several minor (and maybe even a few major) vandalisms we miss each week. I've caught a few while patrolling that may have never been caught (until some unsuspecting user stumbled across them later). I've also found patrolling to be quite helpful in my welcoming committee duties. When you're paying attention to all the edits you're more likely to find new users. Patrolling isn't necessary, it's just another helpful check and balance in the wiki system. — wikisig.gif Joey (talk·edits) 15:00, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
I just started doing it.--Bad Graphics Ghost
At least new pages should be patrolled. This doesn't take long and is very easy, but no one was doing this yet (see Special:Newpages). EDSMILDE


I just did about four hundred and there are at least five hundred more to go. I can't possibly be the only one on today willing to patrol edits, can I? And remember, just because you've viewed an edit, doesn't mean it's been marked as patrolled. You have to click "Mark as patrolled". — User:ACupOfCoffee@ 04:12, 4 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I'm doing it unofficially right now. I can certainly start marking them as patrolled, but are there any guidelines? procedures? I assumed only admin-types were supposed to do it. --notstrongorbad 04:22, 4 Oct 2005 (UTC)
I have been finishing up about 40 or so right now. I don't think we have to go past that. Rogue Leader / (my talk) 04:23, 4 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I assume it wouldn't be appropriate to mark your own edits as patrolled? —notstrongorbad 03:57, 8 Oct 2005 (UTC)

There's no rule against it, and styles vary. If you're doing minor work, it's certainly okay. Personally, if I make a major edit, I'll leave it unpatrolled, at least for a little while, to give someone a chance to review it. After some time has passed, however, I'll go ahead and patrol my own edit. — It's dot com 02:32, 9 Oct 2005 (UTC)
If you're using Firefox, you can middle-click (or scroll-wheel-click) a bunch of links at once to open them in new tabs, patrol them and close the new tabs, and then just refresh the patrol-hidden list. If you're using IE< then I can't really help. ~ Laramie, Why? ~ 02:15, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Thanks Laramie, that's an excellent trick. It's so fast and easy, it's got me patrolling again. Thanks man. Thunderbird 02:42, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

This is getting rediculous. I count over 5000 unpatrolled edits! Can anybody help me? --DENNIS 00:06, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm working on patrolling, but I personally don't feel confident patrolling the Talk, User Talk, HRWIKI, or HRWIKI Talk namespaces. So I would hazard a guess that DENNIS' 5000 number is a bit misleading. Flashfight 00:09, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Patrolling New Redirects

There's a few redirects that need to be patrolled. Everytime I click on the page it goes through the redirect and when I turn the redirect off (http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=Tgs&redirect=no) there's no "patroll this page" link. It's driving me crazy! Can anyone figure it out? --mibluvr13 17:16, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

If you click on a link in Recent Changes that goes through a redirect, the "Mark this edit as patrolled" link should be at the bottom of the page that the link redirected to. Get it? —FireBird|Talk 17:25, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Exclamation Point

What does the red exclamation point mean? Okay, call me stupid but I really don't know what it represents. --Happy 18:47, 14 Aug 2005 (EST)

The red exclamation point is an unpatrolled edit. If you see one, by all means patrol it. If you need further assistance, see the instructions at the top of HRWiki:Recent changes patrol. — It's dot com 23:00, 14 Aug 2005 (UTC)



Just trolls or content?

When marking a edit as patrolled, does the correctness of the content matter? I'm not a H*R expert and am leery of marking an edit as "correct" but don't mind marking them "not a troll". Benabik 00:07, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

When you mark an edit as "patrolled", it lets other users know if that edit has been seen and reviewed. If it is a troll, however, you then have to revert the edit. Has Matt? (talk) 00:10, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
If I'm not sure whether the edit is good or not, content-wise, I just click "back" instead of marking it as patrolled. — It's dot com 00:14, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
That's being irresponsible, commy. Oh-wait, I didn't mean that to sound the way it did. I-I uh....man. Like, woah.Seriously (Talk) 00:18, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Umm, I don't know exactly what you mean, Seriously, but I thought I'd mention that I do the same thing as Dot com, because that way others will check and see if it's good content-wise (one person can't always be sure, after all). Heimstern Läufer 00:21, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
(Edit Conflict) *ahem* Anyway, my two cents: I usually mark the edit as patrolled when I've read it and evaluated it - if I'm pretty sure it's a bad edit, I'll usually revert it or re-edit it, but either way, I mark as patrolled to let others know it's covered. — Image:kskunk_fstandby.gif KieferSkunk (talk) — 00:23, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Seriously, Seriously, if you don't have anything to say, you don't have to post. Also, it's being responsible, because it leaves the exclamation point there until someone else can check it out. For example, I don't know all the ins and outs of the Stinkoman 20X6 game, and so I have a more difficult time patrolling edits on that page than perhaps some other users (other than to see if an edit is vandalism or not). — It's dot com 00:25, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
This sort of thing (people patrolling edits just to patrol edits) is exactly why I don't like the patrolling checkboxes *controversy controversy* ;) If you're not *sure* that the edit is OK, please leave it unpatrolled, otherwise people who only patrol unpatrolled edits won't look at it. That's my two cents. Seriously, it is not at all irresponsible to leave an edit unpatrolled if you're not sure if the edit is OK or not. I leave ALL edts unpatrolled, because I don't want to end up the final arbiter on anything. Homestar Coderhomestar-coder-sig.gif 00:28, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

So true. But it's dot com, just because it's easy to make fun of my name, doesn't mean you have to make an entire other edit to make it funnier.....i'm watching you.......Seriously (Talk) 00:32, 27 January 2006 (UTC) Also, i thought it was funny that i called you commy because that is a traditional abbrev. for communist. and while i am not against them, some people are. Seriously (Talk) 00:33, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you meant by calling Dot com a commy, but i do know that there are people in this world that seem to bring trouble wherever they go. I don't think it's Dot com's fault that all this drama has happened whenever you've been around the past few weeks. I am keeping what you said close to my mind, and I would appreciate it if you would not make Dot com's, whom I have the utmost respect for, life more difficult. —BazookaJoe 00:55, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Check this edit

I don't have this DVD, so I don't know if this is right or not: [1]

If no one else is able to check this out today, I've got the DVD at home and could check it this evening. — wikisig.gif Joey (talk·edits) 18:07, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
I followed the whole transcript, and it's good. The new edits were correct. — wikisig.gif Joey (talk·edits) 03:22, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Adding a name to the list

Seeing as the tildas don't work in the columns, how do you do a timestamp when you sign up? DumbMuscle 16:14, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Not trying to be rude or anything, but someone validated this, so either they're validating pages without wanting be be marked on the patrol (which i can understand), validating pages and having a similar problem to me, or are on the patrol but didnt bother spending a minute or so more to give a bit of advice! DumbMuscle 17:37, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
Some people will just patrol edits without really reading them – just check they're not vandalism and then click the link. Best bet is usually to wait at least a day or two before commenting that noone's replied. Anyways, for your question: there's a couple of ways you can get the timestamp when ~~~~~ doesn't work – you can install the UTC clock and copy it from that, you can type ~~~~~ outside the table, hit Show Preview and copy/paste it... the easiest would be to just not put a timestamp there at all and let someone else who understands that sort of thing fill it in from the edit history. --phlip TC
I have already fixed this, but the fix relies on things that are not available until 1.6. So, just as soon as we upgrade, adding a timestamp using tildes will work as expected. — It's dot com 20:02, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Patrolling Oneself

I just found out that I can patrol changes I made myself. This should be made impossible, because it means that someone can hide his or her own vandalism.  Loafing 03:47, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Just so you know, very few vandals are that smart. They don't necessarily know Recent Changes even exists. Also, many vandals are annonymous IPs, and they cannot patrol at all. It is true, though, that it's possible for them to do this, and for that reason it's actually a good idea, IMHO, to check edits even after they're patrolled if they're from an unfamiliar username or IP. Heimstern Läufer 03:56, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
I know this is a really old post, but I just wanted to point out that it is now technically impossible to patrol oneself. — User:ACupOfCoffee@ 11:03, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm still getting a "mark as patrolled" button for my own edits. Can I patrol them myself? It's pretty infuriating when I take the time to approve others' edits and no one bothers to approve mine, even if they are legit. BBG 22:00, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
I think a script has been set up to where you can't patrol your own edits. Trust me, I've tried. MichaelXX2 mail_icon.gif link_icon.gif 22:02, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Reverting Pages

Is there a button or anything to revert pages? I can't find it.------Panamon Creel 14:56, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

See HRWiki:FAQ#I think I've found some defacement on the wiki. What can I do?. -- Tom 16:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


I Can't Find Any Red Exclamation Points

Why is this? I'm Not Certain 22:58, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Are you logged in while viewing Recent Changes? Trey56 23:00, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Yes. I'm Not Certain 23:04, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, then I can't think of what could be wrong — you should see a red exclamation point to the left of each unpatrolled edit in Recent Changes. Perhaps try a different browser (FireFox is the best for the wiki), but other than that I can't think of what the problem could be. Trey56 23:10, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
I'll try that. I'm Not Certain 23:15, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm on Safari and it works, to let you know. The Goblin!! 23:16, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
It isn't working, maybe it's because I'm new. I'm Not Certain 23:22, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Red exclamation points take a certain period of time before they appear. I don't know what that period of time is, but... OptimisticFool 23:25, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Oh, that sounds like you need to wait to be autoconfirmed, then, I'm Not Certain. In that case, you'll need to wait a little over a day from now before you'll see the exclamation points. Trey56 23:29, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I can wait. I'm Not Certain 23:31, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Is anyone still doing this?

I just spent the better part of this weekend, and a 12-pack of TaB Patrolling what-seemed-like all of the edits from the last week in the Main Namespace. It just seems that with 181 people "committed" to serve in this patrol, why are there still a backlog of literally hundreds of edits from the last month that have gone unpatrolled? I mean, sure it gave me something essentially mindless to do as I sat on the couch and watched the Celtics and Bruins, but it would be really good if people were to accept the commitment they've made and actually patrol some edits. Flashfight 00:19, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

It's similar to the deal with the Welcoming Committee we discussed over the course of almost a year. (See that talk, and have a fresh coffee when you do.) Listing membership here is pointless. There's no oversight, no requirements, it's just "oh, I can sign on to this, maybe they will make me a sysop". Welcoming is something I do as often as I am able without need to sign up for a "welcoming committee", and patrolling recent changes, well, I guess I am totally unaware of why it's important. I generally look at as much of the history, patrolled or not, as I can upon login. I often find changes that need to be fixed. That's been the case for years. So unless this relaxation in patrolling is a very old phenomenon, predating my activity, I don't see any point in patrolling. I never look to see if it has been, I never do it, and I remain yet-to-be-convinced of its importance. The list, though, that's stupid. No need for it, in my opinion. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 02:13, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
To use a tired and not-particularly-enlightening internet phrase, IAWTC. -DAGRON 05:05, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps there should be requirements for membership in the committee, like doing at least ten patrols within a month, etc. --DENNIS 23:53, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Arrow showing multiple edits

Hi Guys:

Does anyone know how to patrol edits with that arrow showing multiple edits at a time? I can't patrol one. Thanks! —Mas12806 (talk·contribs) 17:53, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Shortcuts

It seems my attempt to make a couple of shorcuts has caused a slight ruckus. Just a few arguments I want to make in regards to edits with this page, HRW:RC, and HRW:RCP:

  1. HRW:RC creates consistency with HRW:VC (see HRWiki:The Stick#Committees). I know they don't have the same name, and therefore abbreviation, but as I said, it adds consistency.
  2. Special:RecentChanges is already easily accessible, in the navigation section of the sidebar. I find it redundant and unnecessary that we make HRW:RC, a page in the project namespace, mind you, as a redirect to Special:RecentChanges for this reason.
  3. HRW:RCP seems a little redundant in comparison to the HRW:RC redirect I made, but I'm neutral on it's existence.

Soiled Bargains (talk|ctrb) 22:28, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

I tried to access this page by typing in HRW:RCP earlier. I was getting ready to make the shortcut, but then i saw that someone beat me to it. The Knights Who Say Ni 23:31, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Personal tools