Community Wishlist Survey 2017/Miscellaneous/Implement deferred changes

◄ Back to Miscellaneous


  • Problem: Aside from edits blocked by the edit filter, vandalism and other damaging edits can still be viewed on pages for a short amount of time before they are reverted. According to a 2012 study by the Signpost, around 10% of damaging edits are seen by more than 100 readers, affecting the credibility of Wikipedia. The persistence of vandalism and BLP violations on low traffic biographies of living people is a lingering problem. Despite anti-vandalism bots and semi-automated tools, a substantial proportion of those damaging edits is not identified and reverted in a timely manner. (w:Wikipedia:Deferred changes).
  • Who would benefit:

Readers, as they are less likely to view vandalized pages. Vandal patrollers, who will have more time to revert edits.

  • Proposed solution:

Implement w:Wikipedia:Deferred changes, delaying suspicious edits from being viewed by readers until they have been reviewed by an editor, or reverted, similar to w:Wikipedia:Pending changes. Classification of suspicious edits can be done with edit filters, m:ORES and ClueBot NG's classification system.

  • More comments:

This project has been previously developed mainly by w:User:Cenarium, and has gained near unanimous support (except for one oppose) in a 2016 RfC on enwiki. Development appeared to have been active in December last year, however the project seems to be inactive as no changes have been made since then. Cenarium themselves have not made an edit on the English Wikipedia since April this year.

  • Phabricator tickets:

TasksEdit

CommitsEdit

The finished commits are struck out.

Basic commits
For notification
For simultaneous use of regular patrol
  • gerrit:328111 Make patrol of reviewed changes optional
  • gerrit:315109 Don't autopatrol autoreviewed users in protection-based configs
For easier reviewing
Required for change tags support
  • gerrit:315344 Change tags support (in FlaggedRevs)
  • gerrit:190656 Allow patrolling of tagged changes with minimalist RC patrol (this adds 'problem' tags)

(copied from w:Wikipedia:Deferred_changes/Implementation)

DiscussionEdit

VotingEdit

  •   Support Tgr (talk) 08:25, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Mahir256 (talk) 08:38, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:09, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Ymblanter (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Thomas Obermair 4 (talk) 21:59, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
  •   SupportAmmarpad (talk) 06:48, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Ermahgerd9 (talk) 21:14, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Gulumeemee (talk) 09:35, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support קובץ על יד (talk) 12:15, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Nabla (talk) 23:21, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Termininja (talk) 17:09, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support It has not been explained why this well-supported proposal was droppedNoyster (talk) 20:09, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Galobtter (talk) 12:35, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Tacsipacsi (talk) 13:31, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support I think this would improve our CV measures along with existing tools and new features like the Recent Changes Filters. enL3X1 ¡‹delayed reaction›¡ 15:41, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support LikeLifer (talk) 18:32, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Giraffedata (talk) 22:24, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Ciao • Bestoernesto 01:03, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:34, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Also make it easier to review changes from watchlist NessieVL (talk) 19:18, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support PamD (talk) 10:32, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Jarekt (talk) 14:55, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Dolotta (talk) 17:56, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
  •   Contra Although I share the concern on the problem, I don't agree with what I understand of the proposal. Rather than hiding this changes, it would also be possible to show a little banner "this version as not yet been reviewed and my contain false claim that such a review could clean", plus a toggle button to highlight on/off text which wasn't marked as reviewed and a link to the last "marked reviewed" version. This is rather close with some feature already in production, for example in the Esperanto version, but take the reverse approach to show possibly problematic last version by default. So, this is a soft "against", I do   Support to address the problem. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Psychoslave (talk) 08:20, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support — Luchesar • T/C 13:56, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
  •   Weak support. I like the idea but please avoid creating one more patrolling/reviewing system. In my view it might be a good idea to start with matching FlaggedRevisions with ORES — NickK (talk) 17:12, 11 December 2017 (UTC)