Community Wishlist Survey 2021/Admins and patrollers/Easier flagging
The survey has concluded. Here are the results!
- Problem: We need better tools that allow editors sifting through articles looking for mistakes to flag things for citation quicker and more easily.
- Who would benefit: Mainly editors who dedicate specific editing time. Not everyone can dedicate time to fixing every mistake they encounter, and not everyone searches an article for mistakes every time they view it. This would help those people.
- Proposed solution: Insert an option next to each section header in visual editor mode that reads "flag". For the plaintext editor, perhaps there could be a splitting of the templates into writing and correction templates? Anyway, a click on this would bring up a dropdown menu of the most common mistakes that need to be flagged:
Citation needed Style correction Written like an advertisement etc. This would allow for quicker identification and flagging of mistakes.
- I am not sure how that differs from already existing functionality through inline citations, like Template:Cite and like. --Piotrus (talk) 04:42, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
- This seems better suited to a problem for a user script to solve, but my opinion at least at the English Wikipedia is that people are too quick to flag and too rarely interested in actually solving the problem when they have the resources to do so. — Bilorv (talk) 18:01, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
- I think the Growth team has been working on something like this for new users, but I can't seem to find it. (re "easy things to do to fix a page"). --Izno (talk) 19:47, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
- Izno, I think this proposal is to do the opposite. I think the goal is to tell someone that their edits aren't good enough, not to fix pages. That would be more like Twinkle and PageCuration than like Growth's Suggested Edits work. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 06:40, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
Tracked in Phabricator:
- Obviously a great idea . Enterprisey proposed ~this in Community Wishlist Survey 2019/Citations/Dealing with unsourced additions - "citation needed" button; it got a fair amount of support. See box to the right for the phab ticket, which includes generalization to a user-interface design enabling quick-adds of all inline tags. I'd be very glad to hear Regicide1's opinions on the design suggestions there. The suggestion to link it to an automated notification (not "Your edit has been reverted", but "Your edit has been tagged") might help solve the problem mentioned by Bilorv. Petrb even volunteered to implement a quick-inline-tagger, but then COVID-19 disrupted plans. HLHJ (talk) 19:44, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
- Regicide1, I'd suggest broadening the scope of the "problem" sentence to include all inline tags, like the rest of the proposal, and making it more succinct. I think you are massively understating your case on "who will benefit" . There is evidence that constructive criticism, such as inline-tagging, causes new editors to learn, fix their own edits, and become long-term editors. Currently, reverting is much easier than tagging. Reverting, unsurprisingly, makes both vandals and potential good editors give up. Wikipedia has lifethreatening problems with recruiting new editors; our editor numbers are slowly declining. If we don't fix, Wikipedia will die. Messily, as paid propagandists and shills take over. For more details and citations of the research lit., see en:WP:Encourage the newcomers (an essay to which I have contributed substantially, so not an independent opinion). On the "proposed solution", it might be better to be fairly flexible about the details of the UI, and just describe the functionality we want; working prototypes tend to cause major design changes. We won't really know what method would work best until it's been built. Do the Community Tech Team have any advice on what level of design detail would be optimal? HLHJ (talk) 19:44, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
- I am moving this to the "Admins and patrollers" category since it seems to be more about patrolling. Hope this okay, MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 19:35, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
- We le=redy have this. It's Twinkle. DGG (talk) 10:07, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
- Users ought to be able to work out their own flexible ways of patrolling e.g. look at a page on your watchlist every day or every weekSpinney Hill (talk) 13:46, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
- "next to each section header in visual editor mode" Meaning you have to click the Edit button first and then you can flag things? Maybe just a flag on the main article view that pops up when you hover over it would be better. — Omegatron (talk) 15:03, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
- Support It would greatly help improve dealing with vandalism. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 21:00, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
- Support Krzysiek 123456789 (talk) 21:42, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
- Support Definitely support this. YFdyh000 (talk) 23:16, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
- Support Jaguar83 (talk) 23:20, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose — Bilorv (talk) 01:39, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
- Support. Meiræ 14:22, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose pages will quickly clutter up with petty tags. Current system makes editors commit to making useful changes. Somej (talk) 21:16, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
- Support JRDkg (talk) 09:28, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
- Support Stephan Hense (talk) 23:04, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
- Support Every little bit helps! Atsme📞📧 11:18, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
- Support Blue Rasberry (talk) 00:28, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
- Support Smarty93 (talk) 10:32, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
- Support Neon Richards (talk) 23:17, 18 December 2020 (UTC)