Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2018-06-29/Special report


 * Re: "routing or tagging drafts so that topic experts (perhaps from WikiProjects) can review them" - InceptionBot scans the Draft namespace to put drafts on WikiProject new article lists. --Bamyers99 (talk) 01:59, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Bamyers99@undefined,  just  correcting  your  link. It  should be User:InceptionBot. User:AlexNewArtBot, which  it  supercedes, is blocked. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:49, 30 June 2018 (UTC)


 * It would be nice to have keyboard shortcuts, like in STiki (r for review, n for next in queue, t for tag menu, i for info menu) to save on our wrists and make patrolling repetitive stuff like redirects and sockpuupet userpages easier. cinco deL3X1 ◊distænt write◊  11:56, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
 * If you think  your  suggestion  is useful, and if you are a New Page Patroller, you will  be aware of this page  where you  can list  your  suggestion. That  said, as far as I  understand,   depth and accuracy  of patrolls are more important than speed -  at  least  that  what it  says on  the New Pages Feed. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:28, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I tried, as for how it will affect quality, we only get as good a review as the reviewer has it in them to give, regardless of how easy we make it. If others still feel that a keyboard shortcut for one-stroke reviewing is detrimental, I would recommend having page info and next-in-queue get shortcuts, and review be one mouseclick instead of two. Thanks,L3X1 ◊distænt write◊  14:52, 2 July 2018 (UTC)


 * a black hat editor – blocked and banned. Self portrait. Uhm. WP:DENY? --Xover (talk) 13:59, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Personally I thought that was in very bad taste and offensive. It was a poor joke, made at the expense of an editor. cinco deL3X1 ◊distænt write◊  14:32, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree. But the Editor having already left it in they evidently disagree, so DENY is the only pseudo-policy based argument remaining, that I'm aware of, for its removal. --Xover (talk) 15:18, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
 * If readers were  to  take the time to  read up  on  the entire and extensive history of this affair, they  will  find that  the joke was the editor's own, and it has backfired on him. Although declared paid editing  is not  disallowed per se, the community  at  large does not  approve of paid editing. This editor was seriously using special user rights here and at  OTRS, and sockpuppetry to  his own ends, and the article is a message to  others who  might be trying  to  get away  with  exploiting  the voluntary  work  of users who  compile and maintain this valuable knowledge resource. Please see: Wikipedia Signpost/About. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:20, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * WP:DENY doesn't cover this case at all, as it is about vandals and trolls. The editor in question was neither. Further, are we talking about a "right to vanish" for people who have a less-than-squeaky-clean history with the community? Please note that WP:VANISH specifies "a user in good standing" right in the first paragraph. My opinion is Kudpung acted within his proper boundaries as writer of an editorial piece in this community newsletter – the piece as a whole was not a joke, but an expression of an important point of view. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:16, 2 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you,, for writing about this important work. I'm Marshall Miller; I'm the WMF product manager working on the project, along with WMF Collaboration and Community Tech teams.  Anyone who is interested in learning more or being involved should feel free to check out the project page.  The scope of our project is limited to adding the ability to review AfC drafts to the New Pages Feed, and adding ORES models and copyvio capabilities to the feed for both NPP and AfC prioritization. -- MMiller (WMF) (talk) 04:51, 2 July 2018 (UTC)