Community Wishlist Survey 2022/Watchlists/Hide reverted edits

Hide reverted edits

Clicking on "2 changes" shows an empty diff.
  • Proposed solution: Add an option to hide sets of edits that collectively produce an empty diff. Such a set commonly includes one or more edits by a vandal and a rollback edit.
  • Who would benefit: Editors with many pages on their watchlists. My watchlist contains over 700 pages so hiding the edits that don't require my attention would be a huge help.
  • More comments: As a workaround, I configured my browser to run following JavaScript snippet every time I open my watchlist:
[...document.querySelectorAll(".mw-tag-mw-reverted .mw-plusminus-null")].forEach(
  (el) => { = "none" }
This serves me well but is brittle and clearly not a solution for everyone.


  • I have seen changes of 0 text that were meaningful. You will need to pin down the criteria under which you think this hiding should be made. --Izno (talk) 19:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
    I mean completely empty diffs, not 0-byte changes. The class mw-plusminus-null is just used as a heuristic in my workaround. Dexxor (talk) 21:42, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
    Ah. Yeah, I am not sure this is a good idea even still, because you get permissions-farmers who will make -1 +1 edits that don't change the source for every pair of edits (not that I've seen this too often on watchable pages, but there have been some). Izno (talk) 19:51, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
    A reverted edits is searched using the tag "reverted" Thingofme (talk) 17:03, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
  • How do you even get the "2 changes" layout option? I just get the last edit to a watched page or if you select "Expand watchlist to show all changes" ever edit is separate. Having "x changes" looks useful (and familiar.. like something I used to have...) KylieTastic (talk) 20:17, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
    @KylieTastic: Enable "Group changes by page in recent changes and watchlist" in Preferences § Recent Changes. Dexxor (talk) 15:47, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
  • I would love to hide (better: mark in some way: grey out?) pairs (or larger sets) of consecutive edits which result in no overall change. This includes some but not all zero-byte changes. If someone changes "Trump" to "Biden" I care, even though the size is unchanged. If they change "Trump" to "poop" and it's reverted, I don't care; someone already dealt with that. Certes (talk) 01:55, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
    @Certes: This is exactly what this proposal is about. Don't forget to vote! Dexxor (talk) 15:52, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
  • I'd click disaprove were it an option. I anti-support this item BradVesp (talk) 13:22, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
    @BradVesp: Why is that? Did you carefully read the proposal? Dexxor (talk) 15:56, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Edits reverted in bot mode get hidden. --Tgr (talk) 00:29, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Similar: Community Wishlist Survey 2022/Search/Enable negation for tag filters --Wargo (talk) 23:33, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
  • I use a personal-stylesheet with -- .mw-tag-mw-undo, .mw-tag-mw-rollback, .mw-tag-mw-reverted {opacity: 0.2;} -- It seems to work well. (screenshot). Quiddity (talk) 09:13, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
  • Related task: phab:T190021. Hope that helps! Quiddity (talk) 09:13, 10 February 2022 (UTC)


  •   Support Femke (talk) 19:40, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 22:18, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support SVcode (talk) 00:31, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Javiermes (talk) 15:07, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Aca (talk) 15:22, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Ainali talkcontributions 16:02, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support KylieTastic (talk) 16:07, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support as long as it hides only empty diffs and not changed content of equal size. Certes (talk) 19:31, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Often the size of my watchlist dissuades me from going through it, when in reality most of the changes are reverted. If I could filter them I'd do it without a thought. Sophivorus (talk) 23:06, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Fuger  (Talk) 01:28, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support: substantial use case. I wouldn't enable it as I like to check that if added content has been reverted then none of it was usable and if removals were reverted then there's no issue with that content that does need resolution, and also whether I need to request page protection (if there's a lot of vandalism). However, I can see that clicking on reverted vandalism edits for a lot of people would just be a time sink and they do not want it as part of their workflow. — Bilorv (talk) 11:24, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Titore (talk) 18:55, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Libcub (talk) 23:53, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support JPxG (talk) 01:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support IOIOI (talk) 21:05, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Shooterwalker (talk) 22:15, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support2d37 (talk) 09:46, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 14:38, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Thibaut (talk) 16:11, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Wargo (talk) 23:33, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Yes, to reduce useless edits Thingofme (talk) 10:30, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Aimwin66166 (talk) 06:02, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose If your watchlist is filled with that many unnecessary edits, then clear it up. I don't see how this is necessary. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 08:54, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Dave Braunschweig (talk) 23:44, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support MONUMENTA (talk) 02:54, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Perfectly good edits are sometimes reverted due to a misunderstanding, or mistrust of IP editors. Even if you are only interested in fighting vandals, you should not turn these off - I've seen vandals make reverts just to be disruptive. SpinningSpark 10:17, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
    @Spinningspark: You got a point there but I still believe an option to hide edit groups that produce an empty diff would be useful. Before I had my browser configured to hide those edit groups, I simply ignored them because checking them is a waste of time in 95% of cases. So unhiding those edit groups would not result in me noticing the good edits that you brought up. As long as there are some hardworking editors like you checking every edit I don't see a problem with my approach. For other editors, the proposed feature would increase their productivity and willingness to go through their watchlists. Dexxor (talk) 10:31, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support--Vulp❯❯❯here! 09:11, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support —— Eric LiuTalk 10:14, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
  •   SupportThanks for the fish! talkcontrib (he/him) 17:11, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Ayumu Ozaki (talk) 03:40, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Tom Ja (talk) 18:06, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Rots61 (talk) 23:32, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support KnowledgeablePersona (talk) 23:47, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Prawdziwy Mikołajek (talk) 17:46, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support ~Cybularny Speak? 23:42, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Quiddity (talk) 09:13, 10 February 2022 (UTC)