Problem: On the English Wikipedia, at least, Wikidata has a reputation for being prone to vandalism and errors. In my experience, even on the more visible items, vandalism may take more than a day to be removed and on other items can last for months. Vandalism reversion is also tedious and difficult, particularly since label vandalism can be in hundreds of languages.
Who would benefit: Wikidata editors, and users of the data on other wikis and elsewhere
Proposed solution: Provide better and faster-to-use vandalism-fighting tool(s). This could be one or more tools along the lines of -
Huggle, STiki and Twinkle on the English Wikipedia, with translation capability
Better vandalism fighting bots and edit filters (e.g. preventing height, weight, and gender/sex statements from being added or changed by new users) to better prevent drive-by nonsense insertion
Autoblock IPs and new users who are blocked on other WMF wikis to prevent vandalism from being "exported"
Allow fine-grained protection of individual labels, descriptions and statements to prevent them from being vandalized.
Proposer: Jc86035 (talk) 14:41, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
This would be incredibly useful. The handling of vandalism on Wikidata needs to be up to the same standards as enwp, if not better. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 21:01, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
@Jc86035: Hi. This proposal as it stands currently is too broad and vague. It's way too much work to build all of the tools being asked for here. Do you have any objection if I edit the proposal and narrow the scope to investigating the vandalism issues and building one or more tools to prevent that? -- NKohli (WMF) (talk) 18:31, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
I'll also note Huggle supports Wikidata. Perhaps there are some specific improvements you'd like to see there? MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 18:39, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
@NKohli (WMF) and MusikAnimal (WMF): Feel free to revamp the proposal to make it more specific. I haven't really spent a lot of time reverting vandalism and haven't really looked into the tools much, so input and changes from users with more experience would be much appreciated. Jc86035 (talk) 15:28, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
@MusikAnimal (WMF): I was trying to use Huggle on Wikidata today. There were many problems, the biggest of which was that it doesn't seem to be able to edit Wikidata... Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:33, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Hmm well the inability to edit is obviously an issue! The Huggle developers might be able to help with this. They are pretty responsive at w:en:Wikipedia:Huggle/Feedback if you want to ask there, or you could create a task on Phabricator if you're comfortable doing so. MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 21:26, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
There is also improved recent changes interface by Pasleim. I played with it and it had some nice features — I could patrol all edits of one user who did OK edits, preview diffs, do quick rollbacks, filter edits by type. Some ideas should be taken from there. --Papuass (talk) 09:04, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
Note that my proposal for an improved recent changes (for countervandalism) was moved to Miscellaneous as it could be useful for all the projects - but I think particularly for wikidata, so please take a look over there too! ArthurPSmith (talk) 21:53, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Support I would happy to have a recent changes page that would show (filter) only Items' general statements edits, my local wiki Language descriptions changes (I can't monitor languages I don't know) and changes in links to my language articles. If an Item doesn't have any description or links in my language, I don't want to see it at all. If the change was marked as patrolled, I don't want to see it either . Hummingbird (talk) 02:06, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
Support···🌸Rachmat04·☕ 02:50, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
SupportHiga4 (talk) 08:51, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
Support sure but IMHo the vandalism on wikidata is not as bad as before, i have found much less recently... whilst it might be worse on English wikipedia than one years ago. I feel it is a human factor. I got reverted within minutes in an excessive way while I could find within hours a terrbile vandalism in a key page undetected for a longer time... is wikidata going to end like this? flooded with patrollers who act mechanically and have a kinda superficial interest for the content? Let's hope they will keep their "play" somewhere else... it's the patroller not the vandal that start to worry me. I still believe that you need first more real users, and pushing to increase that.--Alexmar983 (talk) 18:42, 10 December 2017 (UTC)