MYSTlore:Patrolling
From MYSTlore
Patrolling is a feature of MYSTlore's underlying software MediaWiki designed to facilitate peer review of recent changes, including both newly-written articles and edits to existing ones. This helps discover and counter spam and vandalism swiftly, but is also of use when it comes to changes without malintent, such as to fix typos (or errors in wiki markup), point out factual inaccuracies on the talk page, ask for verification or citation, and so on.
Contents |
[edit] Permissions
A normal user cannot patrol; rather, patrolling permissions are handed out by admins to users who have shown experience and consistently good judgment. Please do not ask for patrolling permissions; there are plenty of other great, appreciated ways to contribute to the wiki! Conversely, users with the permissions have no obligation whatsoever of using it regularly or even at all; it is purely a volunteer-based assignment.
[edit] Usage
There are two different interfaces for patrolling recent changes (given the permissions). It's up to your preference which one you'd like to use.
[edit] The built-in interface
This variant is available through two places:
- Special:Recentchanges (which also indicates unpatrolled changes with a red, bold exclamation mark, or lets you show only unpatrolled changes using the "Hide patrolled edits" link), and
- IRC notifications coming from MYSTbot.
In both cases, links have a special rcid parameter in the URL, which adds patrolling to the respective page. If the change is an edit to an existing page, you get – as usual – the diff view on top and the current revision underneath, but with the addition of a "[Mark as patrolled]" link in the (right) current revision column. If the change is a newly created page, a small "[Mark this article as patrolled]" link will appear in the very bottom right of the article.
[edit] Special:Patrol
This interface, from the Patroller extension, is quite different from the one above. It provides for a more streamlined process, and also applies more specific criteria to decide what in particular you can try and approve.
You are presented with a random recent change, either in the diff view (if the article was edited) or in the normal article (if it's new), except for additional options at the bottom that allow you to Endorse a change (approving of it), Revert it while giving one of the pre-defined reasons (e.g., "Simple vandalism") or a custom one, or Skip it altogether if you're unsure and want to let someone else decide instead.
[edit] Comparison
Special:Patrol allows you to go through a larger number of changes more quickly than with the built-in interface, which is more tailored towards individual changes. On the other hand, this also means that, with the built-in interface, you can actually focus on a specific change, and perhaps also make a change of your own if you spot, say, a typo.
[edit] Rules of thumb
- When in slight doubt, skip. If you're unsure whether to endorse a change, revert it or make further edits, the best choice is usually to let someone else handle it.
- When in much doubt, use the talk page. Even if the original contributor of the change won't respond, others typically will, and you can come to a better consensus this way. It's not a fast option, but it leads to the highest-quality results in the long run.
- Don't revert out of ego. Just like you can't patrol your own changes for good reasons (unless you're an admin), you also shouldn't revert future changes back to your version just because you happen to prefer it.
- Do approve nitpicks. A change can look trivial and unnecessary, but reverting it only increases the wastefulness. Generally, just approve it and let it go, or point out on the article's or user's talk page that, while you did approve it, you found the change was superfluous.
