Commons talk:Patrol

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

Gret job![edit]

Great job. I knew that there was something, but not what. So far I never really worked in Special:NewPages and I have always been wondering why this entries are yellow. I don't think those features are referred to in the administration task and a link to this page in Special:NewPages might be useful (along with a minimal one paragraph text).

Some comments on the features.

  • In my IE6, some of the fields become only yellow when hoovering above it
  • I verify and change things all the time starting from my change log, move requests, uncategorized pages, ... and it would save a lot of time if I could mark them as patrolled at that moment too. --Foroa (talk) 08:46, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
I thought all admin edits were marked as patrolled anyway? --Herby talk thyme 16:49, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
They are. Tiptoety talk 23:02, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Corrrect, I meant the hundreds of diffs I verify daily in my watchlist: if I had a simple way of indicating them patrolled (as you have on most wikipedia's) it would save work for the others. --Foroa (talk) 07:16, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I believe there is a script (on en.wp?) that allows you to patrol pages without even leaving the log.. I can't find it right now though. Rocket000 (talk) 07:23, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
en:User:Mr.Z-man/patrollinks.js. Rocket000 (talk) 07:31, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

autopatrolled[edit]

The explanations say "you cannot mark your own page creations as patrolled". but they say also that every patroller is also autopatroller, which means that his creations are already patrolled. This seems contradictory.

I understand that there is a difference in that "autopatrolled" status is different from "patrolled". But this raises the questions, is auto-patrolled an inferior status, and can/must the pages be full-patrolled in addition?

--Ikar.us (talk) 14:45, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

A patroller is a user who can mark edits and page creations as patrolled. His/her own edits are not patrolled. Autopatrollers can not mark edits as patrolled. Their own edits are patrolled automaticly. In Commons:Patrol#Autopatrolled it says this status is for trusted users that do not participate in checking stuff, but just create a lot of pages. That saves us (Patrollers) from having to mark all those. -- Krinkletalk 15:12, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
You say a patroller's own edits aren't patrolled, the page says every patroller is autopatroller. What's true? --Ikar.us (talk) 15:17, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
My bad, every patroller also has the autopatrol right, the page it correct. See also Special:ListGroupRights for a direct represention of the site configuration. -- --Krinkletalk 17:14, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Talk Pages[edit]

If not created by an autopatroller, talk page edits get the ! like everything else. Is there a good reason for patrollers to check them or should we just ignore them on the grounds that they are auxiliary to the main purpose of Commons? If the latter, can we arrange it so that they are all autopatrolled? . . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talkcontribs) 10:01, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Currently there is no need for Patrollers to systematicly check edits by registered users. However, since both registered users and anonymous users are capable of making bad edits, the patrolling is still possible when needed. So I oppose autopatrolling autoconfirmed users. Since I'm someone who has a rather big amount of pages on the watchlist, knowing an edit is patrolled is sometimes reason not to check it anymore (depends per page). –Krinkletalk 10:18, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

COM:AN#Automatically assign autopatrolled user right[edit]

There is a discussion on the automatic assignment of the autopatrolled user right ongoing on COM:AN#Automatically assign autopatrolled user right. --Leyo 12:18, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Discussion was archived here; result was no automatic assignment (but increased efforts to assign the right manually to those recognised as dependable). Rd232 (talk) 12:45, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
What about generating a list of non-autopatrolled users with – let's say – more than 1000 edits? Admins could go through such a list and assign the autopatrolled user right where appropriate. --Leyo 13:30, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
That sounds sensible. Not sure of the best way to do it though. Perhaps a database report? Rd232 (talk) 13:44, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Is there still a need of such a list? I don't know, just throwing out the question. Currently the number of autopatrolled user has increased from 300 (1.5 year ago) to almost 1,200. Myself was "spontaneously" assigned the autopatrolled right when someone obviously saw my edits and decided that "hey, that guy seems to make good edits and does not need to be patrolled manually.". --MagnusA (talk) 13:53, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Recently, I discovered two non-autopatrolled users with more than 3000 edits. The spontaneous assignments are good, but not sufficient IMO. --Leyo 14:20, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
If someone (besides spontaneuos assignments) creates such a list, starts judging the users and possible make assignments, I would not object to that. :-) On the other hand, I am new here and used to en:Wikipedia:Be bold which normally do not apply here. --MagnusA (talk) 14:44, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I am not able to create such a list. What about asking at COM:BWR? --Leyo 16:08, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Someone created lists som weeks ago, Commons:Requests for rights/possible autopatrolled candidates. --MagnusA (talk) 10:37, 23 December 2011 (UTC)