Last modified: 2009-04-14 02:54:56 UTC
It would be nice to be able to have additionally to the existing (diff, hist) functionality to have a third link to the last sighted version, making it (review, diff, hist). Together with the existing option of hiding patrolled edits, this would make recent changes again a viable tool.
Also, it would be helpful if one could distinguish between "unreviewed change" and "change to an article which has never been reviewed before". This could probably be achieved by only having the "review" link when the article has any previous reviewed versions. (The difference between reviewed and unreviewed change is indicated by the "!").
Done in r44039
Does this work on dewiki? I cannot see that link on other wikis.
Yes, it does work on dewiki. To see the link, there must be a reviewed article that was later edited by an user who has no review rights, so on als wiki, you'll probably have to wait for the next IP edit.
Could you also add diff to the last sighted version on watchlist? IMHO It would be helpful in faster sighting new changes.
Re-closing. The above is a different feature request. I'll start looking at it though.
(In reply to comment #5) > Could you also add diff to the last sighted version on watchlist? IMHO It would > be helpful in faster sighting new changes. > A new report would help for tracking.
> To see the link, there must be a reviewed article that was later edited by an user who has no review rights Oh, I must have been blind. But actually I wasn't looking behind the page link but side by side with (diff) (hist). Should have waited some hours to see it ;-) @Aaron: See bug 16636 :-)
While I think it is important for de:wiki to encourage more flagging of revisions, I see a fundamental problem with this: When we encourage editors to only look at difference to last revision, they will overlook intermediate bad edits. Two common scenarios: Scenario 1: Version 1 - sighted Version 2 - some good edits Version 3 - reversion or partial deletion of change 2 Result: Version 2 will get overlooked. Scenario 2: Version 1 - sighted Version 2 - sneaky (or at least not blatantly obvious) vandalism Version 3 - some good edits Result: The change #2 will appear as part of an overall improvement and is more likely to get cemented than without the feature. Instead, I believe it would be much more helpful if we got a fix for #7062, which would make our work much easier already.
This is a general problem not specific to the recent changes link. However, I don't consider it serious, as for scenario 2, it is the job of the editor to make sure that this doesn't happen and flagged revisions help with finding this kind of edits in the first place. In fact, I often find edits of the kind scenario 2 and it was never a problem. As for scenario 1, it doesn't happen often and if it does, there are other ways of remedying this.
A new script from user "P.Copp" on dewiki helps (at least partially) avoiding these problems. importScript('Benutzer:P.Copp/scripts/diffhistory.js'); It shows the history of the article back to the last sighted revision above a diff. So I can see whether a) all changes are from the same user b) some changes have a meaningfull edit comment or c) there's some spoofy IP edit within otherwise good looking edits. Bottom line is that I can see very quickly whether it is necessary to check some of the edits separatelly or whether it is ok to review edits as a whole.
(In reply to comment #11) > importScript('Benutzer:P.Copp/scripts/diffhistory.js'); > See also bug 18454, this should be a FlaggedRevs feature.
