Community Wishlist Survey 2015/Watchlists

Add a user watchlist

Tracked in Phabricator:
Task T2470

Allow editors to "watch this user" by adding a tab or link on user (talk) pages, contributions, history, Special:Block and other appropriate places, and a separate user-watchlist special page which lists the latest contributions from users on the list.

  • As an admin, I want to be able to check on potentially problematic editors at some time in the future.
  • As an experienced user, I want to follow each step of a newbie I'm coaching, to fix their edits, assist in their discussions, provide guidance in general, without having to watchlist all the pages they may edit, so that all my time is spent helping them
  • As a wiki trainer with dozens people to follow, I want to have a page where to have an overview of their complete activity, controlled by a "central" list of usernames which I can just edit/past in a single place. I can then act on specific edits/pages/users or just know what's going on overall.

Limit to admins only if necessary to mitigate stalking concerns. I currently use something I hacked up myself, but this really needs to be in core MediaWiki. MER-C (talk) 12:51, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Earlier discussion and endorsements
For simple wiki training groups, there is toollabs:magnustools/herding_sheep.php. Nemo 15:00, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  Endorsed --V111P (talk) 06:47, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
See w:pt:Special:PrefixIndex/MediaWiki:Gadget-watchUserContribs. Helder 11:30, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  Endorsed--Liridon (talk) 14:01, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Endorsed With use limited to admins or those holding a new, associated userright ("watcher"?), if necessary. Fluffernutter (talk) 17:22, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Doesn't this seem a little stalkerish? Anyone wanting to look at someone's contribs can do that, but it would feel quite creepy to think that, every time one makes an edit, a particular person is alerted. It would make no difference if that person were an admin. Sarah talk 21:40, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • We can also make watchlists public with reasons given for watching and additions and removals logged (like mine is). One would then presume that abuse of the tool would lead to desysopping. MER-C (talk) 12:25, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Endorsed as an admin tool only. This could be very helpful in monitoring problematic users contribs, but it does seem to also have the potential for abuse. Of course, the tool could be developed and projects could decide locally who should have access. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:22, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Endorsed --Gnom (talk) 09:59, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Endorsed It is a bit stalkish. For that reason each project should decide who gets to use this ability or if it is turned on at all. Davidwr/talk 06:10, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Endorsed If "watching" good editors or good admins, or "bad actors" (esp. IP vandals), makes one "stalkerish", so be it... IJBall (talk) 03:46, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Endorsed This would automate actions that can already be accomplished manually. It would be helpful for watching future actions of confirmed vandals and spammers, which is not necessarily an admin task. I'm fine with making this a user-right that needs to be requested (perhaps a similar procedure as asking for rollbacker rights). Etamni (talk) 07:09, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Endorsed 4nn1l2 (talk) 00:12, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Endorsed The use case for me is when I detect a vandal and want to check any subsequent edits by them. That means the feature would have to support IP addresses too. On the other hand, an automatic expiration in, say, two weeks would be acceptable to prevent long term stalking.--ArnoldReinhold (talk)
  •   Comment (I already endorsed above) I endorse adding the code and making it immediately available to admins, I endorse encouraging local wikis to discuss who else will have access, and I endorse extensions to remove privacy concerns such as allowing each user to have a special only-the-editor-and-admins-can-change-it (or even -see-it) "whocanwatchlistme" page where they can add a list of accounts who can watch them. This would allow things like professors requiring students to allow the professor to "watchlist them" when they are editing with an account set up specifically for that class. Davidwr/talk 22:54, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]


  1.   Support 4nn1l2 (talk) 03:25, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Support as proposer. MER-C (talk) 09:48, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Support Samwalton9 (talk) 10:41, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Support Lugnuts (talk) 12:12, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Support Looking through this page, I wonder if the watchlist needs a total rewrite from scratch... This, that and the other (talk) 13:30, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  6.   Support. --Stryn (talk) 19:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  7.   Support Matiia (talk) 20:17, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  8.   Support Grind24 (talk) 20:31, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  9.   Support OK. xaosflux Talk 00:28, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  10.   Support there's a sort of work-around by watching the user talk p. and hoping problems show up there, but this is much more direct. DGG (talk) 02:28, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  11.   Support. I think this is a desirable thing, even if it's decided to restrict it to Admins or special usergroups. IJBall (talk) 03:27, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  12.   Support, Linedwell (talk) 12:16, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  13.   Support--Syum90 (talk) 12:21, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  14.   Support tufor (talk) 14:54, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  15.   Support --Arnd (talk) 14:58, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  16.   Support --Infinite0694 (Talk) 16:02, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  17.   Support JackPotte (talk) 16:11, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  18.   SupportSadads (talk) 16:15, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  19.   Support Goombiis (talk) 16:36, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  20.   Support --Dodi123 (talk) 17:14, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  21.   Support --Tdslk (talk) 19:13, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  22.   Support -- Akela (talk) 21:15, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  23.   Support --Usien6 (talk) 21:20, 1 December 2015 (UTC) // Should be consistently integrated into the regular watchlist.[reply]
  24.   Support --Tacsipacsi (talk) 22:06, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  25.   Support also for non-admins. It can be useful to track infrequent vandals too. Stalking, if that's a concern, is already possible with the regular 'user contributions' too. Gap9551 (talk) 22:17, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  26.   Support Helder 23:18, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  27.   Support Tar Lócesilion (queta) 00:14, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  28.   Support Very useful idea. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:19, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  29.   Support Chaoborus (talk) 02:28, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  30.   Support Sidevar (talk) 09:57, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  31.   Support Graham87 (talk) 12:25, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  32.   Support Would be very useful in vandal fighting instead of periodically going back to problematic editors' contributions pages to make sure they have stopped their behavior.  DiscantX 12:58, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  33.   Support Casliber (talk) 13:33, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  34.   SupportNickK (talk) 13:35, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  35.   Support Yes. Regards, Kertraon (talk) 13:44, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      Support but only for admins and those with a user right created for this purpose. Stevie is the man! TalkWork 13:59, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  36.   Support H.Rabiega (talk) 21:13, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  37.   Support YBG (talk) 05:49, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  38.   Support - very useful in combating vandalism. --Carrotkit (talk) 05:50, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  39.   Support -24Talk 05:52, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  40.   Support If stalkers are or become enough of an issue, then make it a requestable user right requiring some sort of minimum account age and edit count, with simple admin approval. Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 09:35, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  41.   Support --AS (talk) 09:59, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  42.   Support --Hektor Absurdus (talk) 10:08, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  43.   Support Rzuwig 11:09, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  44.   Support Extremely useful in combating vandalism. - Earth Saver(talk)Peace, strive, save the Earth! at 13:06, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  45.   Support--James970028 (talk) 13:12, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  46.   Support--Bowleerin (talk) 13:22, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  47.   Support I can think of a few cases I'm involved in where this would be most useful. --SuperJew (talk) 14:59, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  48.   Support - Sarahj2107 (talk) 22:13, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  49.   Support I have been wanting this for years! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:57, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  50.   Support SantiLak (talk) 10:54, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  51.   Support GY Fan 11:18, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  52.   Support - I first heard this idea several years ago, and I still think it's a great one. Mark MacD (talk) 13:02, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  53.   Support --The Polish (talk) 17:38, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  54.   Support Bináris tell me 18:18, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  55.   Support Avgr8 (talk) 20:48, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  56.   Oppose I think this could be a useful tool for admins or maybe a specific user group, but even if restricted there's a huge potential for abuse and/or erosion of AGF (as well as BITE, fresh start, and other related principles). Also, if it's treated like the regular watchlist, it presents transparency issues, and if made public, it becomes bitey or at least uncomfortable (nobody wants to know they're being actively surveiled). In short, this raises enough questions and concerns regarding community warm and fuzzies and the potential for abuse is high enough that I don't think WMF should be involved with this, if it's attempted at all — Rhododendrites talk \\ 02:02, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  57.   Support I don't see the "transparency issues" referred to in the above !vote; anybody who's maliciously stalking another editor can already keep a browser tab open on that user's contributions and press F5 every few minutes. This would be useful in fighting vandals. DexDor (talk) 19:51, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  58.   Support very beneficial for patrollers. Noyster (talk) 22:49, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  59.   Support --Ziko (talk) 14:11, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  60.   Comment Clearly this would be more efficient than "manual" approaches, but that's often the case with covert surveillance techniques and doesn't make them any more popular with the public. I'd worry that this capability could be misused in unpredictable ways. I'd prefer to see it restricted to situations where the account-being-watchlisted has received one of the more severe user warnings, with a period of supervision linked to the level of warning. That would at least indicate that the account's actions might be monitored for a while. On that basis the right would be suitable for experienced editors who have a track record of issuing relevant warnings and escalating to AIV appropriately. It's nothing to do with adminship per se. - Pointillist (talk) 14:44, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  61. Conditional support. Support if limited only to admins, and if the editor who was put into the watchlist receives automatic notification about this. Without it, oppose for transparency reasons. Beagel (talk) 14:17, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  62.   Support -- We've needed this for years. Antandrus (talk) 16:48, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  63.   Oppose this pretty strongly. If not restricted to admins, encourages clique-behavior, meatpuppetry, and cabals broadly construed. Not good! If restricted only to admins, invites the perception of abuse-of-power: when the list of followers/followees is hidden from view, looks like corruption ("secret enemies list"), but when the list of followers/followees is transparently visible to all, looks like bullying ("I'm watching you punk so go ahead and make my day"). It doesn't matter if 100% of admins use the tool properly, and nobody every pulls a Richard Nixon or a Dirty Harry move -- it still would LOOK LIKE corruption and/or bullying. Wikipedia is not facebook, see en:WP:NOTFACEBOOK, and it is also not en:twitter. We don't need people with 'followers' that stalk their edit-history, either to applaud their every move, or to revert their every effort. It is already easy (too easy!) to track and en:WP:HOUND other people. This proposal is a step in the wrong direction. I understand it was proposed in good faith, and I see the utility for collaborative teamwork among good-faith wikipedians, and for wiki-cops trying to serve-n-protect the 'pedia, but no matter how it is implemented, this proposal won't turn out well: the only winning move is not to play. 17:13, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  64.   Support Needed for a long time. aegis maelstrom δ 11:44, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  65.   Support--Davidpar (talk) 14:48, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-wiki watchlist

Tracked in Phabricator:
Task T5525

Now that SUL finalization is complete, there is no longer an obvious obstacle to developing a proper cross-wiki watchlist. This is a very old request (phab:T5525 from September 2005) and has been cited as one of the reasons why users on, say, Wikipedia are reluctant to branch out and participate on Meta, Commons, etc. There has been an effort to develop this as an external OAuth tool (phab:T92955), but it really should be developed within MediaWiki itself, dovetailing in with the existing Special:Watchlist page in some manner. This, that and the other (talk) 10:05, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Earlier discussion and endorsements
Note: the bug had 32 votes. --Nemo 11:00, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Upcoming phab:T92955 is released as Crosswatch. --Menner (talk) 06:39, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Right now every time I want to check my watchlist, I do it separately for Persian Wikipedia, Commons, English Wikipedia, Meta, and Wikidata. I have to open five pages and check them one by one. If we can have a central place for all of my watched pages (or at least some number of opt-in wikis). It would make my life much easier. We do have a tool in WMF Labs but something integrated with mediawiki sounds more convenient to users. Amir (talk) 23:47, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  Endorsed. This is also one of the reasons some people are so keen to just upload images locally rather than at Commons. Jenks24 (talk) 02:30, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I was just thinking about cross-wiki watchlist and also cross-wiki notifications yesterday :) Yes, please. --Edgars2007 (talk) 05:24, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  Endorsed. Helder 11:30, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  Endorsed Useful. בנימין (talk) 14:21, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]


  1.   Support 4nn1l2 (talk) 03:27, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Support Jenks24 (talk) 10:52, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Support --Gnom (talk) 12:04, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Support This, that and the other (talk) 13:27, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Support Mr. Granger (talk) 17:42, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  6.   Support Patrick87 (talk) 18:11, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  7.   SupportBilorv (talk) 19:33, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  8.   Support Matiia (talk) 20:18, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  9.   Support Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 20:20, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  10.   Support Grind24 (talk) 20:32, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  11.   Support We have enough people at en:wp who refuse to use Commons for fear that their images will be deleted "without warning". This would presumably help alleviate that problem to an extent. Nyttend (talk) 21:38, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  12.   Support Voll (talk) 21:45, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  13.   Support ONUnicorn (talk)
  14.   Support--Kippelboy (talk) 05:39, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  15.   Support--Gbeckmann (talk) 09:22, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  16.   Support-- Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 09:28, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  17.   Support Linedwell (talk) 12:16, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  18.   Support Waiting for this for years --mfb (talk) 12:24, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  19.   Support--Syum90 (talk) 12:24, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  20.   Support tufor (talk) 14:56, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  21.   Support Wittylama (talk) 15:09, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  22.   Support · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 15:19, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  23.   Support--KRLS (talk) 15:20, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  24.   Support - Master of Contributions (talk) 15:23, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  25.   Support --Continua Evoluzione (talk) 15:25, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  26.   Support--JohanahoJ (talk) 15:52, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  27.   Support --Infinite0694 (Talk) 16:02, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  28.   Support JackPotte (talk) 16:11, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  29.   SupportSadads (talk)
  30.   Support Goombiis (talk) 16:37, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  31.   Support --Dodi123 (talk) 17:15, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  32.   Support --Isacdaavid (talk) 17:57, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  33.   Support Apokrif (talk) 20:03, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  34.   Support --Hkoala (talk) 20:32, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  35.   Support --Akela (talk) 21:13, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  36.   Support --Usien6 (talk) 21:22, 1 December 2015 (UTC) // Also the additional features from the Labs tool (eg. inline display of diff's) plus the ability to dismiss the notifications you already acknowledged (may be implemented with cookies to exempt the server from load) and a quick "send thanks" button.[reply]
  37.   Support -- 2ReinreB2 (talk) 21:51, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  38.   Support --Nouill (talk) 21:59, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  39.   Support --Tacsipacsi (talk) 22:08, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  40.   Support Gap9551 (talk) 22:20, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  41.   Support StevenJ81 (talk) 22:44, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  42.   Support Helder 23:18, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  43.   Support Tar Lócesilion (queta) 00:14, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  44.   Support --Oriciu (talk) 00:56, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  45.   Support Chaoborus (talk) 02:29, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  46.   Support Popcorndude (talk) 03:54, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  47.   Support provided that users can easily opt out of it. Would like to see it able to be selective as well, so that users can group together some but not all projects. Risker (talk) 04:35, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  48.   Support Syced (talk) 05:20, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  49.   Support Stanko (talk) 08:00, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  50.   Support Litlok (talk) 08:40, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  51.   Support Bgwhite (talk) 09:36, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  52.   Support --Barcelona (talk) 12:06, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  53.   Support Graham87 (talk) 12:30, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  54.   Support This would be useful even for editors who have only made a handful of edits outside of their main wiki.  DiscantX 13:00, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  55.   Support Casliber (talk) 13:35, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  56.   Support Yes. Regards, Kertraon (talk) 13:46, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  57.   Support Stevie is the man! TalkWork 14:02, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  58.   Support --β16 - (talk) 14:32, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  59.   Support. That was the feature that justified forced SUL unification, and it has to be implemented — NickK (talk) 15:42, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  60.   Support Mike Peel (talk) 23:24, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  61.   Support YBG (talk) 05:50, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  62.   Support --Carrotkit (talk) 05:51, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  63.   Support -24Talk 05:52, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  64.   Support Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 09:39, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  65.   Support Rzuwig 11:09, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  66.   Support - tucoxn\talk 14:11, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  67.   SupportArkanosis 15:10, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  68.   Support Orbwiki107 (talk) 17:30, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  69.   Support Theredmonkey (talk) 19:15, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  70.   Support Nikkimaria (talk) 01:31, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  71.   Support SantiLak (talk) 10:54, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  72.   Support --The Polish (talk) 17:37, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  73.   Support Bináris tell me 18:18, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  74.   Support Halibutt (talk) 00:28, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  75.   Support Much more convenient.- Earth Saver(talk)Peace, strive, save the Earth! at 13:35, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  76.   Support Much needed for anyone who ever cross-wikis. Alsee (talk) 18:12, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  77.   Support J36miles (talk) 00:52, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  78.   Support Courcelles 08:38, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  79.   Support (as for me, a kind-of-two-tabbed watchlist — with the local and the crosswatch version — would already be a huge benefit compared to the little-known, not-so-easy-to-find extra tool whose existense is a big step forward indeed) → «« Man77 »» [de] 18:17, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  80.   Support Martin of Sheffield (talk) 23:11, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  81.   Support --Edgars2007 (talk) 09:16, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  82.   Support Beagel (talk) 14:21, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  83.   Support -- yup. SUL owes us that. :) Ijon (talk) 10:07, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  84.   Support --Davidpar (talk) 14:49, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This has been implemented in Crosswatch. It should be incorporated into Special:Watchlist too. It is revolutionary, and will make it easier to edit more. If editors can edit more in the same period of time, then that can help maintain the number of active editors (5 or more edits per month):

Earlier discussion and endorsements
  Endorsed Ottawahitech (talk) 04:38, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]


  1.   Support --Usien6 (talk) 21:24, 1 December 2015 (UTC) // Plus the ability to dismiss the notifications you already acknowledged (may be implemented with cookies to exempt the server from load) and a quick "send thanks" button.[reply]
  2.   Support Should make it easier to check the watchlist in one go.  DiscantX 13:04, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Support There's already a gadget to see this in popups, but a dropdown that's built-in certainly would be nicer to have. Stevie is the man! TalkWork 14:07, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Support That watchlist really is a lot nicer than the watchlists we currently have. Too bad this proposal is not getting votes - probably that is in part because the title and description are unclear and you have to look at the screenshot on another page to see what it's about. --V111P (talk) 22:08, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Support SantiLak (talk) 10:54, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  6.   Support I agree with V111P that it needs a better explanation (and I don't get the relationship to the number of active editors), but afaics from the screenshot it means that you can look at a diff without needing another mouseclick to return to the watchlist. That would make watchlist checking more efficient (especially for those editors with good size screens). It would also be neat if it could show not just the last edit to a page but previous edits (as one diff) if they are by the same editor. DexDor (talk) 22:59, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  7.   Support Beagel (talk) 14:24, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  8.   Support --Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 22:55, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Section watchlists

Tracked in Phabricator:
Task T2738

I would love to be able to watch sections of a page instead of whole articles, particularly for pages like Reference Desk. Otherwise, pertinent changes to sections that interest me get superceded by subsequent changes to other sections.

Earlier discussion and endorsements
  Endorsed Agree would be useful for ANI were all one may be interested in is certain sections. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:14, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Superseded by Flow? --Ricordisamoa 16:06, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes Flow would solve this issue I think. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:10, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, because Flow is a failed experiment. The Quixotic Potato (talk) 14:43, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, because the Future of Flow is unclear, and it doesn't alter the request to watchlist sections that aren't Flowized. Alsee (talk) 12:29, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  'Endorsed'Support. Section watchlisting is a long requested and very valuable ability. This is clearly NOT Superseded by Flow, as Flow obviously doesn't work on non-Flow pages, and obviously can never work in Articlespace. Alsee (talk) 19:50, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  Endorsed --Gnom (talk) 21:19, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]


  1.   Support 4nn1l2 (talk) 03:26, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Support MisterSynergy (talk) 09:11, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Support Samwalton9 (talk) 10:41, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Support Jenks24 (talk) 10:51, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Support --Gnom (talk) 12:04, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  6.   Support Lugnuts (talk) 12:12, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  7.   Support MrX (talk) 15:06, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  8.   Support Menner (talk) 16:25, 30 November 2015 (UTC) Adding watchlist for the first heading level would be sufficient if UI looks overloaded during testing.[reply]
  9.   Support Tryptofish (talk) 18:08, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  10.   Support --Enos733 (talk) 18:49, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  11.   Support Dalba 21:06, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  12.   Support --UV (talk) 23:17, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  13.   Support IJBall (talk) 03:29, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  14.   Support Wugapodes (talk) 05:48, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  15.   SupportYnhockey (talk) 09:27, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  16.   SupportDoc James (talk · contribs · email) 09:29, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  17.   Support--Shizhao (talk) 09:45, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  18.   Support--JohanahoJ (talk) 15:54, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  19.   Support --Infinite0694 (Talk) 16:02, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  20.   Support Sadads (talk) 16:16, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  21.   Support Apokrif (talk) 20:08, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  22.   Support--Akela (talk) 21:13, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  23.   Support Yes! Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:20, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  24.   Support Popcorndude (talk) 03:54, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  25.   Support and please note that this is something very different from what Flow is attempting to offer. Risker (talk) 04:36, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  26.   Support Often only part of the page is of interest to me.  DiscantX 13:05, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  27.   Support as long as renamed sections continue to be watched. Stevie is the man! TalkWork 14:11, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  28.   Support, per Risker — NickK (talk) 15:43, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  29.   Support Yes, for talk pages, ANI, and various other places where I don't want to watch the whole page but want to look for comments on a particular topic. PamD (talk) 21:55, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  30.   Support YBG (talk) 05:52, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  31.   Support Rzuwig 11:09, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  32.   Support preach --SuperJew (talk) 14:59, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  33.   Support Logical Fuzz (talk) 21:56, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  34.   Support Nikkimaria (talk) 01:31, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  35.   Support SantiLak (talk) 10:54, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  36.   Support Mlpearc (open channel) 17:32, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  37.   Support Bináris tell me 18:20, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  38.   Support Gods yes! I help out at DRN from time to time and we have just started discussing sub-pages for this exact reason; so we can watch the pertinent discussions. So much use for the other Noticeboards as well! Let alone the article pages. Cheers, Drcrazy102 (talk) 23:26, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  39.   Support J36miles (talk) 00:53, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  40.   SupportRhododendrites talk \\ 02:04, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  41.   Support Probably not that useful for articles, but for discussion pages, please, yes. Courcelles 08:40, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  42.   Support Would make it possible to follow a particular section of interest on public forums that see many threads per day. Noyster (talk) 22:54, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  43.   Support Wikipedia is hurt every day by the absence of watchable sections, at least in those cases where editors have chosen to put important "to-do" items in a particular section on a busy page, but people decline to follow up with the to-do list because they don't want to have to click and read every time someone makes an edit to the busy page. I added a bot request for this that's going nowhere. The lack of watchability is a significant time sink for me at WP:ERRORS on en.wp's Main Page. The claim at Phab that coders can't give us this because they can't figure out how to track sections in wikicode is irrelevant; if we can identify a list of sections we want to make watchable, it's only necessary to take a diff of the page edits periodically, discard everything above and below selected (and possibly hidden) text, and check for equality. If it's necessary, it wouldn't bother me to limit watchability only to those sections where it's been demonstrated that lack of watchability is causing an ongoing problem. Dank (talk) 19:15, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  44.   Comment If technically possible, I'd like to be able to watch a category in the sense that I can see whenever a page is added or removed from the category. Gap9551 (talk) 23:20, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  45.   Support useful. Alsee (talk) 23:57, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  46.   Support only for discussion pages. That would be useful if you want the fastest response in your watched section. But   Oppose on articles, templates, and others that aren't discussion pages, as it is useless in non-discussion pages. It would be better to watch the whole article to prevent vandalism. --Pokéfan95 (talk) 05:25, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  47.   Comment. It is unclear for me how it will work in the reality. I understand its usefulness in the case of Afd, Cfd, different notice boards etc, but how it would be work in the case of ordinary articles? If I would like to have the full article in my watchlist, should I add all sections of that article separately to the watchlist or is it still possible to have the whole article in the watchlist as a single entry? I support this proposal if both options will be available; otherwise strong oppose as it will mess up the watchlist. Beagel (talk) 14:36, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tools for fly-by-night-editors to analyze silent reverts



I am a fly-by-night-editor: Most of my edits are to pages I visit only once. Occasionally I get feedback for my edits in the form of a overt revert, but not very often. If I were an optimist, I would pat myself on the back and assume that my work has been accepted. But I am a realist and I know that many of the edits I made have been silently reverted once I have left the scene, when another editor simply edited over my edit rather than revert it. This is my definition of a silent revert.

Silent reverts happen for two reasons I can think of:

  • The most common is probably done by another fly-by-nighter who parachutes into an page, knows nothing about its history and simply edits something that s/he believe needs fixing
  • There are also a few editors who revert silently deliberately on-the-sly. In my case these types are stalkers who for reasons they have never shared with me just do not like my edits. They know I do not watch pages I edit and take advantage of it.

Tool request

It would be nice to have a tool that one could use to analyze a sampling of articles one edited to easily spot silent reverts.

Sorry for submitting this half-baked tool request, but it looks like time is running out on this survey. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:34, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Earlier discussion and endorsements


  1.   Support. --Stryn (talk) 19:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Support --Purodha Blissenbach (talk) 15:04, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Support Popcorndude (talk) 03:55, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Comment I think this proposal isn't warranted due to probable very limited use of it, but there's an English Wikipedia script that can help you: en:User:Markhurd/hidetopcontrib.js -- on your Contributions page, running this will hide all the pages where you were the last editor, making review of pages edited since your last edit much easier to do. I would love to see this incorporated into the base wiki code. It has helped enormously with pages I ordinarily do not want to watch, yet I want to see if anyone has touched my previous work in an unconstructive manner. Stevie is the man! TalkWork 14:24, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Support SantiLak (talk) 10:54, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  6.   Comment There's a proposal above to watchlist sections of a page (mainly for certain discussion pages, but it'd be useful for articles as well). That would allow you to keep an eye on changes to a section you're interested in without as much watchlist noise as watchlisting the whole article - that seems a better solution than attempting to detect silent reverts. DexDor (talk) 20:05, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  7.   Oppose per Popcorndude and DexDor. Beagel (talk) 14:39, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Watchlist priority options


Many veteran Wikipedians have watchlists that span thousands of articles, completely beyond the ability to effectively manage. If said Wikipedian can't edit for a certain period (say, a week), just going over the changes in the watchlist can take hours and become a chore that editors simply avoid, at the possible expense of missing vandalism and/or edits that they need to see.

There are external tools for creating and organizing watchlists in different ways, but I'd like to see many of those features built-in as part of MediaWiki. One important addition should be a tag for 'high-priority' articles, similar to how GMail has a tag for 'important' e-mail. While having multiple watchlists would support such functionality indirectly, it would be great to be able to see articles marked as 'important' inside the existing watchlist, and be able to filter them like one can now hide/show own edits, hide/show bot edits, etc. —Ynhockey (talk) 20:49, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Earlier discussion and endorsements
  •   Endorsed as this is a collection of rather annoying shortcomings in core MediaWiki. All editors of all MediaWiki installations should benefit from this, so   Oppose if it is implemented as an extension, gadget or any WMF specific means. MER-C (talk) 12:44, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Endorsed :JarrahTree (talk) 00:24, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Endorsed My watchlist has become a useless list with dozens entries each day, after 10 years. I want more customization, colors, etc. --Piotrus (talk) 04:59, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Endorsed Same the above. Along with customization on I/F, I'd like to have a sort function by selected namespaces. Currently we can search in one namespace with an associated one (main + talk etc,), but sometimes we have to search in multiple namespaces, like Project+Project talk+User talk etc. --Aphaia (talk) 05:09, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Endorsed This is indeed a much-needed feature. I've tried to achieve this by extending my CSS configuration. This is, however, quite cumbersome and also tricky as apostrophes and other characters cannot be used in CSS tag names. I would suggest to give users options to colorize watchlist entries, i.e. the operation that adds a page onto a watchlist should have the option to give it a specific color (for a fixed set of colors depending on the overall style). Color assignments should also be possible while viewing the watchlist. --AFBorchert (talk) 06:54, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Endorsed 4nn1l2 (talk) 09:13, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Endorsed--Liridon (talk) 13:56, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Endorsed --Yann (talk) 16:09, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Endorsed I would love to have " watch for a week/month/year" option. I also find current watchlists very hard to manage and had to in the past ask for help when my watchlist grew bigger than tools ability to display. --Jarekt (talk) 19:15, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Endorsed Kropotkine 113 (talk) 21:37, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Endorsed Of course. IJBall (talk) 03:44, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Endorsed I also like the idea submitted by Jarekt (above) that would allow me to add something to my watchlist and optionally specify an expiration, at which point I'll automatically stop watching it (perhaps more useful with talk pages than mainspace articles, but still a useful function). As long as we are discussing the watchlist, it would be nice if there was a way to create a private note about pages on one's own watchlist, such as to-do items or a self-reminder as to why the item is on the watch list in the first place. It would also be useful if a user could specify a section, rather than an entire article, for a watchlist. This might be useful if I place a comment on a particular talk page, and want to be notified if someone replies below my comment, but I'm not concerned about other conversations on the same page. (Probably most useful on drama boards, Jimbo's talk page, project space, etc.)Etamni (talk) 07:22, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Endorsed I want to be able to flag certain items for a month at a time. --Timeshifter (talk) 17:43, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]


  1.   Support 4nn1l2 (talk) 03:25, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Support MER-C (talk) 09:50, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Support Samwalton9 (talk) 10:40, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Support Lugnuts (talk) 12:11, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Support cool suggestion! Alleycat80 (talk) 09:28, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  6.   Support Ovedc (talk) 09:55, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  7.   Support · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 15:24, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  8.   Support Apokrif (talk) 20:06, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  9.   Support --Usien6 (talk) 21:26, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  10.   Support There definitely needs to be a way to differentiate between pages on a watchlist, by priority, topic, or something similar to reduce the volume of edits an user needs to go through after an absence. -- 2ReinreB2 (talk) 21:54, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  11.   Support Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:21, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  12.   Support--Barcelona (talk) 12:06, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  13.   Support Casliber (talk) 13:35, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  14.   Support, just two priorities (high and low) would be enough — NickK (talk) 15:44, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  15.   Support and I also have a similar idea to tame watchlists: Implement phab:T58719 for watchists (and recent changes). If I could click "hide trusted", that would really trim down what I see. Stevie is the man! TalkWork 16:56, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  16.   Support But I don't want "high-priority" only. In fact, I disabled this option on Gmail. Instead, I use tags/markers and different types of "stars". That's what I want.--MisterSanderson (talk) 01:30, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  17.   Support Ldorfman (talk) 14:56, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  18.   Support particlelarly the duration idea. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:24, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  19.   Support SantiLak (talk) 10:54, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  20.   Support Mlpearc (open channel) 17:34, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  21.   Support Chenspec (talk) 21:15, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  22.   Support, I haven't used my watchlist in years, precisely for this reason. Halibutt (talk) 00:29, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  23.   Support --Yeza (talk) 17:04, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  24.   Support; oh so many times I come back after a few days and I have to use the advanced search in multiple tabs. So annoying! I can't believe this hasn't already happened, but who knows, WMF may just have a good reason gathering dust somewhere since it got discarded. Cheers, Drcrazy102 (talk) 23:23, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  25.   Support J36miles (talk) 00:54, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  26.   Support in anticipation of a time that I don't check my watchlist multiple times a day :) — Rhododendrites talk \\ 02:05, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  27.   Support (although not high priority) - particularly if it automatically put subpages of your user page (and their talk pages if necessary) on the priority list. DexDor (talk) 20:16, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  28.   Support OMG yes. Dank (talk) 19:18, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  29.   Support Mz7 (talk) 04:48, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  30.   Support Beagel (talk) 14:42, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  31.   Support--Z 12:35, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  32.   Support --Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 22:56, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  33.   Support -- would make my watchlist more useful. Ijon (talk) 10:06, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Watchlist timed expiry


I would like to be able to set an expiry time for watchlist items, of say one week or one month. There are many pages that I do maintenance on or repair vandalism that I would like to watch for a brief period of time, but have no long term interest in. The UI I envisage would just have additional tick boxes: watch this page indefinitely, watch for one week; watch for one month. Derek Andrews (talk) 23:49, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Earlier discussion and endorsements


  1.   Support 4nn1l2 (talk) 03:26, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Support MER-C (talk) 09:44, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Support Samwalton9 (talk) 10:41, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Support Lugnuts (talk) 12:12, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Support IJBall (talk) 14:00, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  6.   Support Tryptofish (talk) 18:08, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  7.   SupportBilorv (talk) 19:38, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  8.   Support Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:04, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  9.   Support Graham11 (talk) 03:30, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  10.   Support--Gbeckmann (talk) 09:21, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  11.   Support--Shizhao (talk) 09:45, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  12.   Support--Syum90 (talk) 12:32, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  13.   Support --Arnd (talk) 14:58, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  14.   Support Wittylama (talk) 15:09, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  15.   Support --Continua Evoluzione (talk) 15:25, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  16.   Support · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 15:26, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  17.   Support Goombiis (talk) 16:38, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  18.   Support --Isacdaavid (talk) 17:49, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  19.   Support--Kimdime (talk) 19:54, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  20.   Neutral Seems useful, but not necessarily a priority. This system would probably also require a method of notifying users when watched pages become un-watched, which seems like a lot of work for something users can already do manually with more control. -- 2ReinreB2 (talk) 21:56, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  21.   Support Gap9551 (talk) 22:35, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  22.   Comment Related, I'd like to be able to search my own user contribution list for articles that have been edited since my last edit, i.e., show only my latest edit for each page except those for which I'm still the last editor. That would make it quick and easy to see which of my edits may have been changed in the last few days. Gap9551 (talk) 22:44, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Gap9551: check out en:User:Markhurd/hidetopcontrib.js. It does exactly what you need. Stevie is the man! TalkWork 16:56, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Stevietheman: Great, thanks! Gap9551 (talk) 21:07, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  23.   Support Helder 23:18, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  24.   Support Chaoborus (talk) 02:30, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  25.   Support. Hand in hand with this, being able to remove pages from one's watchlist directly from the watchlist would be incredibly useful. Risker (talk) 04:39, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  26.   Support--Jarekt (talk) 05:06, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  27.   Support Litlok (talk) 08:42, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  28.   Support Bgwhite (talk) 09:37, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  29.   Support Sidevar (talk) 10:24, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  30.   Support  DiscantX 13:09, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  31.   Support --β16 - (talk) 14:31, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  32.   SupportNickK (talk) 15:44, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  33.   Support There are pages I watch expressly for this purpose, but I don't want it to be beyond so many months. One month probably isn't enough for a lot of these cases. More specifically, it would be nice to be able to say "stop watching this so many months after the last vandalism", but that's probably too much to ask for. Stevie is the man! TalkWork 17:03, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  34.   Support Yes - I've got a ridiculously large watchlist and in many cases a month or so would be fine, as any contentious editing would almost certainly have been done by then. PamD (talk) 22:00, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  35.   Support Mike Peel (talk) 23:24, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  36.   Support --AS (talk) 10:01, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  37.   Support --V111P (talk) 11:17, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  38.   Support --SuperJew (talk) 15:01, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  39.   Support - Sarahj2107 (talk) 22:16, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  40.   Support SantiLak (talk) 10:54, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  41.   Support --Mark MacD (talk) 13:05, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  42.   Support Bináris tell me 18:16, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  43.   Support Halibutt (talk) 00:30, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  44.   Support J36miles (talk) 00:55, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  45.   Support KylieTastic (talk) 16:19, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  46.   Support I don't think this is something that has occurred to me before, but it seems like a smart feature request — Rhododendrites talk \\ 02:06, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  47.   Support but this should be far down the priority list. Courcelles 08:39, 8 December 2015 (UTC
  48.   Support Aircorn (talk) 08:54, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  49.   Support Yes! Then I would maybe start using my watchlist again. --Waldir (talk) 15:55, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  50.   Oppose unless amended to "remove from watchlist after specified period *if & only if* there have been no further changes since it was added to the watchlist". I don't want entries to disappear irrespective of further activity! Noyster (talk) 23:00, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  51.   Support - Bcharles (talk) 23:29, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  52.   Support--Ziko (talk) 14:13, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  53.   Support OMGx2 yes. Dank (talk) 19:19, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  54.   Support This is a much needed way to avoid permanently clogging up the watchlist. Alsee (talk) 00:06, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  55.   Support This would be useful to reduce the needless size of watchlists. Mz7 (talk) 04:47, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  56.   Support --Z 12:35, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  57.   Support Very useful. --Sphilbrick (talk) 15:22, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  58.   Support very useful. Saves having to seasonally prune one's watchlist and remove precisely those pages that you only wanted to watch for short-term reverts or comments. Ijon (talk) 10:08, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]