Wikipedia talk:Page Curation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia talk:New Page Triage)
Jump to: navigation, search
Tutorial Noticeboard School Curation Help (video) Page feed R&D Coordination Reviewers

One source[edit]

Several of the tags under the Sources tab of the page curation toolbar all put {{One source}} instead of the more appropriate tags. For example, the checkbox for "third party sources" ought to place {{Self-published}} but places {{One source}} instead. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 18:18, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Issue with user talk post[edit]

So, I just proposed an unsourced BLP article for deletion using page curation, and the message that was automatically left on the article author's talk page had duplicate headings. Is this is known bug, or did I do something wrong? Cordless Larry (talk) 12:42, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Possibly Cordless Larry. I'll check it out when I get round to it. If MusikAnimal is watching this page it's something he could probably do even quicker and fix on the fly.
There is also another bug: If one wants to change a deletion tag of any kind, it keeps reporting 'This page is already tagged for deletion' even though the tag has already been removed. This of course then forces the use of Twinkle to get the job done, which is unfortunate because Twinkle is not supposed to be the default page curation tool.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:46, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Kudpung, I was just about to leave you a message on your talk page to see if you had any idea about what was happening here, and then I saw this. I'm having the same issue as well, but even for leaving comments after review (see here [1] ). I actually prefer Twinkle for CSDs because it is easier to navigate IMO, so I haven't seen if it is impacting there, but I suspect it might be as well. TonyBallioni (talk) 05:32, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Well, although I'm not a prgrammer, the WMF have practically thrown it back at me to ajust the site js (or whatever it is) in the CSD pane of the curation tool to make it not only as their sleep and do it for us in 10 minutes instead of the 6 hours I've already spent on it. Again, MusikAnimal has the skill to do it, if of course we can twist his arm.... Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:47, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
If we could enter any bugs/issues directly into Phabricator moving forward that would be very helpful. Make sure to add the "MediaWiki-extensions-PageCuration" tag. This way we can triage, enter it into sprint planning, etc. See mw:How to report a bug if you don't know how to do this. Pinging me in these discussions is fine but the issue will get buried in my notifications, where if you enter it into Phabricator it will be documented and exposed to all developers, volunteers and staff alike, hence the likelihood of it getting fixed is dramatically higher. I've done only minor work on Page Curation so I'm not really the best go-to, sorry! MusikAnimal talk 18:16, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done had never done this before. Will do in the future if there are any other issues. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:37, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

"Unremarkable"[edit]

This may seem like a minor semantic argument, but I think the choice of wording in the curator can be confusing, especially for editors who have recently started reviewing. Anyone who's seen a few dozen AfD noms along the lines of "article does not establish notability" is probably fairly familiar how even sometimes experienced editors can misunderstand WP deletion policy.

A7 is not an existential criteria as it pertains to the subject of an article. It does not make a claim of fact regarding whether a subject is in fact significant, and less so, notable. A new article about a person who is in fact notable under WP:NEXIST, may nonetheless qualify for A7 if the article is sufficiently poorly written so as to make no claim of significance. In other words, an article may qualify for A7 even though its subject may easily pass an AfD.

The current wording in the recent changes to the curator seems to fairly clearly imply that the person is in fact unremarkable, when the criteria that is actually being applied is that the article does not establish otherwise. TimothyJosephWood 13:45, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

@Timothyjosephwood:, This does not appear to be a software bug. The recent changes to the Curation tool brough it in line with the CSD descriptions used elsewhere. If you consider this issue to be of sufficient concern, probably the first place to discuss it would be at Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:46, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Kudpung กุดผึ้ง, elsewhere where? And why do those descriptions matter at all in comparison to the actual policy? This does not require a discussion on WT:CSD because the entire point is that the curator text does not currently reflect the relevant policy. TimothyJosephWood 02:05, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
AFAIK those texts were taken from the ones in Twinkle. More reason why Twinkle should not be used for New Page Reviewing if you believe the CSD criteron to be incorreect, but many of us have been using them for a decade or longer. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:09, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
No...I...Maybe I'm not being clear. I don't have a problem with the CSD criteria. I have a problem with the fact that the text used in Curator does not reflect the actual criteria. CSD is a policy. So when Curator disagrees with policy, Curator is wrong, not the other way around. TimothyJosephWood 16:04, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
There are seven A7 criteria in the Curator 0 te same ones in Twinkle. This is not the venue to discuss something that is not a bug. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:42, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
And whether or not Curator and Twinkle match has nothing to do with anything. TimothyJosephWood 10:49, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
As I suggested, consider taking your problem to WT:DELETION. AFAICS, It's not a software bug. If you believe it is, file a case at Phabricator, but that is not the venue for discussing policy. To reuse the words of MusikAnimal: If we could enter any bugs/issues directly into Phabricator moving forward that would be very helpful. Make sure to add the "MediaWiki-extensions-PageCuration" tag. This way we can triage, enter it into sprint planning, etc. See mw:How to report a bug if you don't know how to do this. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:49, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

"Dead end"[edit]

I watchlisted a recently created page I edited, and when I later checked the watchlist, I saw that the page had been marked as a "dead end" in the Page curation log. I'm guessing this means no outgoing links. Considering the other meaning of the phrase, it might be threatening for new users to see this in their watchlist. I propose this to be changed to "no internal links" or something similar. DaßWölf 01:42, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

That seems like a reasonable concern and improving that terminology might help newer patrollers. —Tom Morris (talk) 12:33, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Dead end makes sense to me. Similar to 'orphan', no need to be all PC about it in my opinion. InsertCleverPhraseHere 21:55, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Page curation toolbar bug (double header when adding messages when reviewing a new article)[edit]

When you use the message feature to add a message when marking a page as reviewed using the page curation toolbar it creates a double header bar (two copies) of the 'A page you started (---) has been reviewed' If this could be fixed that would be great. here is an example. InsertCleverPhraseHere (forgot to sign this, sorry folks)

Thanks for the heads up, Bill. To repeat the words of MusikAnimal:
If we could enter any bugs/issues directly into Phabricator moving forward that would be very helpful. Make sure to add the "MediaWiki-extensions-PageCuration" tag. This way we can triage, enter it into sprint planning, etc. See mw:How to report a bug if you don't know how to do this.
Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:31, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Bill and Kudpung this is already in Phabricator and has someone working on it. Just as an FYI. I'll add the diff of this thread to the bug just so people know it is a concern of the community. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:38, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Opps, seems we should have been pinging Insertcleverphrasehere instead. Sorry Bill for the pings, The information above is still the case, however :) TonyBallioni (talk) 01:45, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

tool tags with notability neologisms in stead of academics[edit]

The Page Curation tool tags articles tagged for Notability > Academic with {{notability|1=Neologisms|date=January 2017}} in stead of {{notability|Academics|date=January 2017}}. For an example, see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Emmanuel_Navon&diff=next&oldid=762575442 and subsequent edits. Mduvekot (talk) 16:58, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Mduvekot please file the bug at Bugzilla - I only voluntarily coordinate here but I am not a developer. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:04, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
An admin needs to change
        notability_neologisms: {
          label: 'Academic',
          tag: 'notability',
          desc: 'The page\'s subject may not meet the notability guideline for neologisms.',
          params: {
            '1': $.extend( {}, param['1'], { value: 'Neologisms' } ),
            date: param.date
          },
          position: 'top',
          multiple: true
        },

        numbers_neologisms: {
          label: 'Numbers',
          tag: 'notability',
          desc: 'The page\'s subject may not meet the notability guideline for numbers.',
          params: {
            '1': $.extend( {}, param['1'], { value: 'Numbers' } ),
            date: param.date
          },
          position: 'top',
          multiple: true
        },
to
        notability_neologisms: {
          label: 'Neologisms',
          tag: 'notability',
          desc: 'The page\'s subject may not meet the notability guideline for neologisms.',
          params: {
            '1': $.extend( {}, param['1'], { value: 'Neologisms' } ),
            date: param.date
          },
          position: 'top',
          multiple: true
        },

        notability_numbers: {
          label: 'Numbers',
          tag: 'notability',
          desc: 'The page\'s subject may not meet the notability guideline for numbers.',
          params: {
            '1': $.extend( {}, param['1'], { value: 'Numbers' } ),
            date: param.date
          },
          position: 'top',
          multiple: true
        },
in MediaWiki:PageTriageExternalTagsOptions.js (beginning line 549). This should correct the problem. The neologisms label is currently 'Academic' instead of 'Neologisms', and numbers_neologisms: should be notability_numbers:. — JJMC89(T·C) 21:43, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done Moving forward feel free to make a protected edit request at MediaWiki talk:PageTriageExternalTagsOptions.js MusikAnimal talk 22:30, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

CSD notification problem[edit]

Whenever I mark a page for CSD, the tool keeps on loading forever. I can refresh the page and the page will be tagged with the CSD, but the creator of the page is not notified on their talk page. Any ideas? Meiloorun (talk) 🍁 04:52, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

This appears to be the case for me too. I've logged it in Phabricator. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:37, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
The issue is also being tracked as T157053. JbhTalk 19:22, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up. I didn't see it when I searched. I've commented on the task you created saying they can be merged. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:31, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewing - Election for coordinators[edit]

New Page Reviewing - Election for 2 coordinators. Nomination period is now open and will run for two weeks followed by a two-week voting period.

  • Nomination period: Sunday 5 February to 23:59 UTC Sunday 19 February
  • Voting period: Monday 20 February to 23:59 UTC Monday 06 March

See: NPR Coordinators for full details. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:50, 5 February 2017 (UTC)